The URL can be used to link to this page

1997 07 08 PC2 �OFTN� PLANNING COMMISSION REVISED A G E N D A An Adjourned Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California July 8, 1997 4:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. MAY BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING Beginning Resolution 97-039 Beginning Minute Motion 97-009 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call C. Election of Chair and Vice Chair II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the June 10, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Item .................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-340 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-054, CHANGE OF ZONE 97-083, SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, AMENDMENT #4 TENTATIVE TRACT 28545, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 97-607 AND 97-608 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 97-003 Applicant ........... KSL Recreation Corporation and its assigns Location & Request 1. Recommendation of approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. 2. Recommendation of approval of a Specific Plan amendment to update the Specific Plan and allow new development and uses for the area generally comprising La Quinta Resort, Santa Rosa Cove, La Quinta Resort and Golf Course, abutting tracts and hillsides to the west, and the southeast corner of 50`'' Avenue and Eisenhower Drive. 3. Recommendation of approval of a General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential for .6 acres at the northeast corner of Calle Mazatlan and Camino Quintana and 17.6 acres at the southeast corner of 5Uh Avenue and Eisenhower Drive and other General Plan Amendments necessary to accommodate resort uses. 4. Recommendation of approval of a Tentative Tract to divide La Quinta Resort and Club area into 135 + numbered lots and 3 + lettered common area lots on approximately 62 ± acres for the area generally encompassing the La Quinta Resort and Club, west of Eisenhower Drive generally to Calle Mazatlan and South of Avenida Fernando. 5. Recommendation of approval of a Site Development Permit to allow removal of ten tennis courts, 18 hotel units, employee parking, and replacement with single family residences and a health spa for the area generally located between Avenida Obregon and Calle Mazatlan, south of La Quints Tennis Club and on the east side of Avenida Obregon. 6. Recommendation of approval of a Site Development Permit to allow the construction of a golf course/hotel maintenance complex, including a 19,440 square foot building and parking lot for all hotel and golf course employees on 6.2 acres located on the south side of 50`h Avenue, approximately 210 feet east of Eisenhower Drive. 7. Recommendation of approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness to assure architectural compatibility between historic structures and proposed construction pursuant to the Secretary of Interior Standards. Action ............... Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_ PC/AGENDA B. Item .................. Applicant ............ Location ............. Request .............. Action ................ ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 97-056 City of La Quinta Highway Ill Prohibition of independent used car sales, excluding new car sale with associated used car sales in the Regional Commercial District Resolution 97- C. Item .................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-337 THE CENTRE AT LA QUINTA SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28525 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-034 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-603 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 97-002 Applicant ........... STAMKO Development Location ............ South side of State Highway 111, between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road Request ............. Recommendation of a Certification of the Environmental Impacl Report prepared for Specific Plan 97-029; Development Agreement 97-002, Conditional Use Permit 97-034, Site Development Permit 97-603, and Tentative Parcel Map 28525, as being adequate anc complete; recognizing the overriding considerations to certair, adverse environmental impacts; and recognizing the significant adverse environmental impacts which cannot be avoided, but whicr can be reasonably mitigated, if the proposed project is implemented, and a recommendation to approve to divide an 87-acre multi -phase Mixed Commercial proposal consisting of an auto sales/service mall and a retail complex, subdivision of the site into ten parcels to allom a Conditional Use Permit to allow auto service/sales, review of the building elevations and development plans for five auto saleE facilities, and a Development Agreement. Action .............. Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_ VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item ................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-611 Applicant .......... Century Crowell Communities Location ........... Southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street (Montecito at L, Quinta Norte) Request ............ Approval of new prototype single family house plans for Tract 27895 Action ............. Resolution 97- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Report of the City Council meeting of July 1, 1997. IX. ADJOURNMENT PC/AGENDA 00,6(4P 2 C S Q9jKrC4U R y OFT PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California July 8, 1997 4:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. MAY BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING Beginning Resolution 97-039 Beginning Minute Motion 97-009 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call C. Election of Chair and Vice Chair II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the June 10, 1997 and June 24, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Item .................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-340 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-054, CHANGE OF ZONE 97-083, SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, AMENDMENT #4 TENTATIVE TRACT 28545, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 97-607 AND 97-608 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 97-003 Applicant ........... KSL Recreation Corporation and its assigns Location & Request 1. Recommendation of approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. 2. Recommendation of approval of a Specific Plan amendment to update the Specific Plan and allow new development and uses for the area generally comprising La Quinta Resort, Santa Rosa Cove, La Quinta Resort and Golf Course, abutting tracts and hillsides to the west, and the southeast corner of 50h Avenue and Eisenhower Drive. 3. Recommendation of approval of a General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential for .6 acres at the northeast corner of Calle Mazatlan and Camino Quintana and 17.6 acres at the southeast corner of 50"' Avenue and Eisenhower Drive and other General Plan Amendments necessary to accommodate resort uses. 4. Recommendation of approval of a Tentative Tract to divide La Quinta Resort and Club area into 135 + numbered lots and 3 + lettered common area lots on approximately 62+ acres for the area generally encompassing the La Quinta Resort and Club, west of Eisenhower Drive generally to Calle Mazatlan and South of Avenida Fernando. 5. Recommendation of approval of a Site Development Permit to allow removal of ten tennis courts, 18 hotel units, employee parking, and replacement with single family residences and a health spa for the area generally located between Avenida Obregon and Calle Mazatlan, south of La Quinta Tennis Club and on the east side of Avenida Obregon. 6. Recommendation of approval of a Site Development Permit to allow the construction of a golf course/hotel maintenance complex, including a 19,440 square foot building and parking lot for all hotel and golf course employees on 6.2 acres located on the south side of 50`h Avenue, approximately 210 feet east of Eisenhower Drive. 7. Recommendation of approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness to assure architectural compatibility between historic structures and proposed construction pursuant to the Secretary of Interior Standards. Action ............... Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_ Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_, Resolution 97-_ PC/AGENDA B. Item .................. Applicant ............ Location ............. Request .............. Action ................ ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 97-056 City of La Quinta Highway 111 Prohibition of independent used car sales, excluding new car sale; with associated used car sales in the Regional Commercial District Resolution 97- C. Item .................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-337 THE CENTRE AT LA QUINTA SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28525 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-034 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-603 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 97-002 Applicant ........... STAMKO Development Location ............ South side of State Highway 111, between Adams Street and Dunt Palms Road Request ............. Recommendation of approval of a Certification of a Mitigate( Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and recommendation of approval to divide an 87-acre multi -phased Mixed Commercia proposal consisting of an auto sales/service mall and a retai complex, subdivision of the site into ten parcels to allow Conditional Use Permit to allow auto service/sales, review of thf building elevations and development plans for five auto sale, facilities, and a Development Agreement. Action .............. Resolution 97- , Resolution 97- Resolution 97- Resolution 97- , Resolution 97- , Resolution 97- VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item ................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-611 Applicant .......... Century Crowell Communities Location ........... Southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street (Montecito at L, Quinta Norte) Request ............ Approval of new prototype single family house plans for Tract 2789� Action ............. Resolution 97- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Report of the City Council meeting of July 1, 1997. IX. ADJOURNMENT PC/AGENDA MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California June 10, 1997 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:04 P.M. by Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Newkirk to lead the flag salute. B. Chairman Abels requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Gardner, Butler, Newkirk, Seaton, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. C. Staff Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of May 27, 1997. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Seaton to approve the minutes as submitted. B. Department Report: Chairman Abels informed the Commission that staff was requesting to start the regular meeting of July 8, 1997, at 5:00 p.m. due to the two major projects that were on the agenda. Following discussion, it was unanimously approved by all Commissioners to start the July 8, 1997 meeting at 4:00 p.m. The La Quinta Hotel request would be considered first and the Auto Mall project second. PC6-10-97 I Planning Commission Meeting June 10, 1997 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Washington square specific plan 87-011. Amendment #2. Vesting Tentative Tract 27031. and Site Development Permit 97-605; a request of the City of La Quinta, Apollo Inc., and Eagle Hardware and Garden for an Amendment to the Washington Square Specific Plan, a one year time extension for the Vesting Tentative Tract, and review of the building elevations, site, lighting, sign, and landscaping plans for a one story 208,000 square foot retail building. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to identify the location of Lot "D". Staff reviewed the locations on the map. 3. Commissioner Woodard asked why staff was not asking to see the complete site development plan. Staff explained this was a timing issue for the Tentative Tract Map. As the applicant was asking for a time extension for the tract and the lots were tied to the Specific Plan, they were required to be submitted at the same time. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained and gave a complete analysis of the site. It is a traffic generated Specific Plan and it never identified specific uses on the site. 4. Commissioner Woodard stated he did not understand how a map with roads and parcels could be thrown away and come back later with a new design and yet approve one project in the middle of the project. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained the tract map is tied to the Specific Plan and the entire tract must go with the request for the time extension. 5. Commissioner Woodard asked staff to explain trip generations. Principal Planner Fred Baker stated this is unique to this Specific Pln. A formula is used to determine the Floor Area Ration (F.A.R.) and he went on to explain how it was determined. PC6-10-97 2 Planning Commission Meeting June 10, 1997 6. Commissioner Woodard asked staff to show where the ten foot landscape easement was to be located. Staff showed the details on the map. 7. Commissioner Woodard asked where the sound wall was to be located. Staff stated it was across the street on the west side to reduce the noise for the Highland Palms tract. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained this is the existing wall that is on the west side of Washington Street from the Saint Frances of Assisi Church to Simon Drive. 8. Commissioner Woodard asked if the landscaping plans had a height limit on the berms. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated it would be three feet. Commissioner Woodard questioned Condition #47, as to why the landscaping was to be approved by staff. Staff stated the applicant would be required to meet the Conditions of Approval. If the Commission wanted the landscaping to come back to the Commission, the conditions would be changed to reflect this. 9. Commissioner Gardner asked what the height of the berming and landscaping would be on Highway 111. Staff stated it would be three feet. 10. Commissioner Newkirk questioned Condition #5 of the Specific Plan as to whether or not the applicant would be required to build the six foot decorative wall on 471h Avenue. Staff clarified this was a condition of the Specific Plan and as the applicant did not have any uses that would require the wall, he would not participate in the wall costs. 11. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify the square footage of the proposed building. Principal Planner Fred Baker stated at was 212,058 square feet. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify the street access off Highway 111 nearest Simon Drive. Staff stated they would be required to give the City an easement to provide for the access. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that Condition #43 of the Site Development Permit clarifies the access driveways and went on to explain how they would function. Discussion followed regarding the alternatives that were available to the applicant. PC6-10-97 3 Planning Commission Meeting June 10, 1997 12. Commissioner Woodard asked what the grid system was on the elevation drawings. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio explained it was the entry design. Commissioner Woodard asked if the columns were out front of the wall. Staff stated the applicant would need to explain. Commissioner Woodard asked staff to identify what the hard line was on the site plan on the northwest property line. It appeared to be landscaping pockets. Principal Planner Fred Baker explained it was the curb line. 13. Commissioner Tyler stated he did not understand why Condition #20 of the Specific Plan was being required. Principal Planner Fred Baker stated this was a condition of the Specific Plan and the lot configuration was a part of the Vesting Tentative Tract. Commissioner Tyler asked staff if this was part of the existing or proposed. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained this was a part of Amendment # 1 and #2 to the Specific Plan. 14. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Thomas Sconzo, Sconzo/Hallstrom Architects, the architect for the project, gave an overview and history of the project and Eagle Hardware. He clarified that the columns referred to by Commissioner Woodard, were ten to twelve feet away from the building toward the parking lot. The overhanging canopy runs from one end of the building to the other and comes out almost to the sidewalk. It was their opinion that shade would make the customers more comfortable. All the exterior walls would be treated so the concrete would not be seen. 15. Chairman Abels asked why Eagle had chosen La Quinta to be their first site in California. Mr. Sconzo stated he did not know, he thought it might be a marketing strategy. Other members of the development team were present to answer any questions the Commission may have. Mr. Jack Franks, owner of the property, stated the owner of Eagle Hardware and Garden is a property owner in the desert and wanted to have one of their stores in the desert. 16. Commissioner Newkirk stated he was concerned about the competition between the two hardware stores. He did not want La Quinta to be stuck with one, or two large buildings standing vacant. Mr. Sconzo explained the viability of Eagle Hardware. PC6-10-97 4 Planning Commission Meeting June 10, 1997 17. Commissioner Gardner stated he was impressed with the rendering and in particular the 12-foot overhang. He stated the plan indicated that the roof would have the flat concrete tile and he was curious how they would react to changing it to "S" shaped red tile to match everything else in La Quinta. Mr. Sconzo, stated that as long as theirs was blue, he would not care if the blue were "S" shaped. They were wanting a contemporary look instead of the traditional Spanish architecture. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio clarified that the Architectural Guidelines did not speak to a specific design theme, but to the quality of design. 18. Commissioner Gardner asked what type of vegetation would be on top of the three foot berm and if it would block the parking lot from those driving down Highway 111. Also, would the one driveway access be enough to handle the demand? Could the berm be raised above five feet? Mr. John Vogley, landscape architect, stated the berming on Highway I I I would be consistent with the corridor planning as outlined by the City. They envisioned the berm to be 18-inches to 3-feet with planting on top of the berm. This would provide screening of the parking lot from Highway I I I but would not block the view of the mountains. Commissioner Gardner asked Mr. Vogle to explain the line of site. 19. Commissioner Woodard asked how the water retention would be handled. Mr. Vogley stated retention was not required between the parking lot and berm. 20. Commissioner Butler stated the City should be very proud of this project and in his opinion, would be highly used due to the growth in La Quinta. He stated he thought the Highway 111 landscaping had a standard for berming height. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated it is in the narrative, but was not shown on the plans. 21. Commissioner Woodard stated the architecture was superb. On the west elevation, he questioned the columns being 12-feet out. Mr. Sconzo clarified that the west elevations columns were six feet out to break up the building. 22. Commissioner Woodard stated his only concern architecturally was the front elevation on the left side of the upper wall. In his opinion, it was extremely long and needed to be broken up. The right side has a stepped parapet to breakup this elevation. He would like the same treatment on the left side. Mr. Sconzo stated it was possible. PC6-10-97 5 Planning Commission Meeting June 10, 1997 23. Commissioner Seaton complimented the applicant on the design, and stated her concern was the number of same -type businesses coming into La Quinta and the probability of empty buildings. She then asked him to explain the lumber drive -up yard. Mr. Sconzo explained the process of the lumber yard. Commissioner Seaton questioned the roll -up doors. Mr. Sconzo stated the doors are open during business hours and closed when the store closes. He did not believe they would be an issue. Commissioner Seaton asked if the color of the sign was red. Mr. Sconzo stated it was his understanding that it would be red, but he would need to refer to the people who do the signs. 24. Chairman Abels stated his first concern was also regarding the economic viability of two of the same retailers in close proximity. However, after hearing how the store operated, it was his opinion that they were different from each other and Eagle would be catering to a different clientele. He then commended the applicant for having an acceptable design upon their first submittal. 25. Commissioner Newkirk stated that he had heard from friends that they were the "Nordstroms" of hardware. 26. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public hearing. 27. Commissioner Woodard commended the applicant and asked that the berms be required to be three feet, the left portion of the top parapet wall be similar to the right side parapet, and the landscaping on the center walkway be modified to include large specimens. 28. Commissioner Gardner concurred that the berm be three feet with a substantial amount of landscaping. He too had an objection to the wall and would like to have the additional treatment. 29. Commissioner Newkirk stated he concurred with the statements that had already been made. 30. Commissioner Tyler stated he did not believe La Quinta Drive had not been adequately identified. The Environmental Impact Report speaks about Fugitive Dust and he would like to know if the Commission can condition the PC6-10-97 6 Planning Commission Meeting June 10, 1997 applicant to use the vacuum style of street sweeper to minimize the dust. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated they had prepared a Fugitive Dust Plan based upon the guidelines for air quality and this is all they are required can do. Staff can suggest they use the other sweeper, but cannot require them to do so. 31. Commissioner Tyler stated he had a problem with conditions from the previous plan being brought forth for Commission approval and not having the Specific Plan and Tract conditions updated. What the Commission should do depends on how quickly the applicant is going to update the Specific Plan. For example, several of the conditions of the Specific Plan have already been completed and the conditions do not reflect this. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the Specific Plan encompasses the entire site. This request is only a small portion of the overall project. Therefore, the City can only require the applicant to address these issues at this time. As the remainder of the site is still to be completed, some of the conditions had to remain in place to see that all areas are addressed. The Site Development Permit addresses what Eagle Hardware is required to do. The Specific Plan addresses what the entire site is required to complete. 32. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to define a "transient" station. Staff stated that if refers to taking the Sunline bus stop off of Washington Street and moving it to Simon Drive. That may or may not happen. It was something Sunline wanted the City to address. At the present time the bus stop appears to be working where it is currently located. Commissioner Tyler asked what the bus stop design would be. Staff stated it would be according to the Highway 111 Guidelines reviewed previously by the Commission. 33. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Woodard/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97-032 recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (EA 97-339) according to the Findings set forth in the Resolutions. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Seaton, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. PC6-10-97 7 Planning Commission Meeting June 10, 1997 12. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Gardner/Woodard to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97-033 recommending approval of Washington Square Specific Plan Amendment #2, as conditioned with the recommended changes to Condition #20. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Seaton, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 13. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Tyler/Gardner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97-034 recommending approval of Vesting Tentative Tract 27031, subject to conditions as modified. Condition #38 to read that reference be given to Section 13.160.060 of the Subdivision Ordinance A-G including requirements for details on height, size, and location of proposed buildings, architectural elevations, schematic plans and material boards, preliminary grading and landscaping plans, and a phasing plan for proposed development prior to recording the final map. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Seaton, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 14. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Butler/Gardner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97-035 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 97-605 to allow construction of a 212,085 square foot one story retail building, subject to conditions as modified: a. A three foot minimum berm. b. The left portion of the upper left parapet be modified to mirror the right side parapet. C. The central walkway area have the larger trees. 15. Commissioner Tyler stated that from the presentations, discussions, comments, questions and answers that have taken place during this public hearing, it is obvious that the applicant has gone to great lengths to tailor his project to comply with La Quinta's Zoning Codes and building regulations, and to blend Eagle Hardware and Garden into our community. As we have heard tonight, the proposed development, as conditioned, meets or exceeds PC6-10-97 Planning Commission Meeting June 10, 1997 the established community standards. As a Planning Commissioner he applauds the applicant for his efforts, and looks forward to Eagle Hardware taking its place in the City's business community. It is his intention to give this project his favorable vote. However, as a concerned citizen of La Quinta, he has some very real concerns regarding the obvious fact that Eagle Hardware will essentially duplicate other similar, nearby competitive endeavors, one of which hasn't opened yet. One has only to travel Highway 111 east a couple of miles into the City of Indio to see a vacant "big box" hardware/lumber/garden center that folded after only about a year of operation. On Indio Boulevard, another similar outlet (without the garden adjunct) recently closed its doors after many years of operation, due to the prospect of intense competition from a nation-wide chain. Another lumber/hardware operation near the corner of Washington Street and Interstate 10 closed a year or two ago, although it has recently reopened under new management. In the nearby retail complex of Dinah Shore and Monterey Avenue, where there are two big competing nation-wide lumber/hardware/nursery outlets, one appears to be barely hanging on. He strongly supports free enterprise and spirited economic competition. However, as a planner and as a conscientious citizen, he would certainly hate to see La Quinta end up with a vacant "big box" building, regardless of which side of Highway 111 its on. He can only hope that your market research has been thorough and accurate, and that this community can and will support two very similar, profitable operations in close proximity. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Seaton, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: A. Community Development Director Jerry Herman informed the Commission of the Conference on June 19t' concerning Coachella Valley Economic Development. If anyone intended to go, they would need to contact staff to make the arrangements. VIII. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS: A. Commissioner Tyler reported on the City Council meeting of June 3, 1997. PC6-10-97 9 Planning Commission Meeting June 10, 1997 B. Chairman Abels stated he would attend the next City Council meeting. He encouraged all Commissioners to attend the meeting of June 12th regarding the Highway I I I Guidelines. C. Commissioner Tyler stated he would like to commend Commissioner Newkirk for his service while serving as a Planning Commissioner. This was to be his last meeting as he had chosen not to re -enlist. Commissioner Newkirk thanked everyone and stated he enjoyed his term. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Gardner to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting to be held on June 24, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. on June 10, 1997. PC6-10-97 10 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING #A - KSL DATE: JULY 8, 1997 Since distribution of the Planning Commission agenda packet, a number of letters regarding the proposed La Quinta resort proposal have been received. Copies of these letters are attached for your review. Also attached are copies of the resolutions for the two Site Development Permits and General Plan Amendment. A revised Zone Change resolution is attached and replaces the resolution in the staff report. The applicant has submitted revised or new plans to provide additional information. These include: 1. Revised site, floor and elevations plans for health spa. 2. Plan showing fire apparatus access to 119 resort residential units and health spa. c: Jerry Herman, Community Development Director memospa121 e,04,pc ECOVE JUL 0 81997 CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT "0.-1�5�:�a��Ui Tn 0? i? �.;r P.171 AFLES —U1,EPMgN �_1 - Shelley Zugerman Charles Zugerman, M.D. 1118 Mohawk Road Wilmette, Illinois 60091 847-256-7659 07/06/97 Community Development Department and the Honorable Mayor and Councilpersons 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 To whom it may concem: J U L 0/ 1997 Cii i �� l_ _'��.i•.`ITrA j We are recent purchasers of a property at 76992 Calle Mazatlan, La Quinta and we have several concems about the KSL Desert Resort's proposed condominium project and the zoning changes they are requesting for the La Quinta Resort. Because this information came to me just yesterday, it is impossible for my wife and I to be there for the July 8, 1997 Planning Commission hearing since we are now residing in Chicago. The following are our concerns: 1. The increase in zoning density will lead to overcrowding with resulting traffic, parking, noise and security problems. There will be increased utilization of facilities making use of these facilities more difficult and less enjoyable. 2. We bought our condominium at La Quinta partially because of the excellence of the tennis facilities there. When we stayed there last March, we noticed however that tennis courts were not always available during prime morning hours. The proposed plans will remove seven tennis courts and will add approximately 190 homes in the resort. This will greatly increase overcrowding of the tennis facilities. A R L E ERMAN T E L IN .7)125 � 79C'ij 1 Tun ,f 1D 2 �2 J S, , ? = P . )2 � 3. We recently bought the property with the idea that it will be rented for part of the year. The presence of 190 new condominiums may increase competition with our unit decreasing revenues. If the new condos are one week rentals only, then it may be less likely that our unit which is a one day minimal rental will receive as may of the more lucrative one week rentals. Also, it is possible that more rentals will be directed to the new more luxurious units especially initially. 4. With a project this large, there is likely to be noise, dust, detours, and other inconveniences which will make the use of our unit less desirable for us and our renters. This may lead to decreased utilization of the unit with decreased revenues. We would like to know how that will be minimized. We feel that there are many important questions that need to be asked, discussed and answered before any decision on this requested project can be made. We strongly recommend that Planning Commission hearing be postponed until these questions are analyzed, answered and the answers are disseminated to all concerned parties. cc. La Quinta Tennis Villas Association Office P.O1 -03-97 07:22P Surflanal To: From: Re. The Community Development Department and the Honorable Mayor and Councilpersons Ronald and Nanci Robertson 77-10o Calle Mazatlan Fax: 805/684/ 1464 KSL Proposed Project and "Zoning Change J j JUL 0 7 1997 CITY OF LAUuINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT We respectfully request a postponement for the July Su' hearing so that suf Ictent time can be maje to assess the proposed KSL project. The first notification made aware to the homeowners by the Community Uei, clopment Department was the first part of Junc re: the hearing July Sth, only one months notice. Ccrtainly this is not a reasonable letigth of time for review of such a large project and with such enormous impact on the surrounding area. La Quints Hotel with past and present owners has been good for the La Quinta community because of its undeniable success but the proposed plan would impact the whole area and it's understated quality and deserves the time and thought to renew, the proposed changes. The La Quinta Cottncilpersons and Mayor would want nothing less for the community. Sincerely. - Ronald and Nanci Robertson 7/07/1997 12:34 19149460055 ,J JUL 0 7 1997 Ji 1 U CITY OF LAQLIU�TA PLANK?PIG CEPRRTMENT _._ ROBERT DEMUTH ASSOC. PAGE 01 V, ICA.,% Aciv� v (I ROMERT L. OEMUTH GLEN PARK ROAD PURCHASIL NKW YOM wurr r=',l- x '7 G o 7 -7-7— -7/ o / V t V,' 1(�. . .r I-L c r i -z - c&..S f--, q tf-.& r, J I> z t. C.a K K �'•Q.r- q-.�S e � /�'s Svc r' •� "{'i �..� G7 f .� �, I : JRiKF DCYLE PHONE NO. : 619 564 0843 Jul. 07 1997 08:02AM P1 Date: July 4, 1997 James and Kaye Doyle 76.942 Calle Mazatlan )La Quinta, California 92253 'hone and Fax: (760) 564-0843 Facsimile Coversheet Number of pages including coversiheet -I — To: Community Development Department and the Honorable Mayor and Counci.lpersons 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Fax: 777-71.01 Remarks: KSL Proposed Zoning Change lJ JUL 0 71997 CITY OF LHCJINTA I PLANNING DEPARTMENT After studying the plans for the above proposal, our opinion is that the proposed zoning change would be beneficial to the community at large. The additions and changes that KSL has made so far have been an asset to the community and we feel that the proposed zoning change would result in an appropriate addition to the area. _. Kaye le e F. Do Ames R. Doyle y Y cc: La Quinta Tennis Villas Association Office Fax: 564-4882 FPOM : From S. Diller 7n/97 PHONE NO. : 619-4596n4 7 r. c (!C- To: Mr. Jacquex. Abel Fax 760 7777155 City of La Quinta Planning Commission .' From: Sheldon Diller Board of Directors Enclave Mountain Estates Dear Sir: Jul. 07 1997 09:59AM P2 c� G7 The Enclave Mountain Estates are 54 homes and homesites that are within 100 yards of KSL's proposed planned expansion in the La Quinta Hotel area. Within the past ten days a Public Notice was sent to property owners of our Association advising of a public meeting on July Sth regarding KSL's proposed expansion. The notice was sent to their La Quinta addresses, and the meeting is scheduled at a time when more than 951% of the property owners are not in residence. In fact, l feel confident that the majority of owners have not seen the Public Notice and will not be able to voice any concerns they may have over the proposed development. This, coupled with the fact that we believe that there is insufficient time for property owners to investigate the ramifications of the proposed development, require our Board of Directors request a postponement of the Public Hearing until late October, when the "Public" affected win be in residence and can investigate this matter. We would appreciate you distributing this correspondence to the other members of the Planning Commission. Thank you for your cooperation. Shelad Diller Phone 6194596311 Fax 6194596334 Copy: L.Q. City Council ,J Jul~ G 7 1997 J PLANNING DFPARTM NT FPOM : From S. Diller PHONE r 10. : 619-3596Z3-4 Jul. ©; 199 ( 09 : 59AM P1 7!1/97 To-L.Q. City Council Glenda Holt R L `' ` ' r, Ron Perkins - Stan Sniff Terry Henderson Don Adolph From: Sheldon Diller Enclave Mountain Homeowners Assn. Please distribute the attached correspondence to the City Council Members. Thank you La Quinta Planning Commission La Quinta, California Mountain Estates Homeowner's Association c/o Desert Resort Management P.O. Box 4772 Palm Desert, CA 92261 Dear Planning Commission: July 2, 1997 l JUL a 21997 U CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Mountain Estates Homeowner's Association is opposing specific parts of the KSL development plan scheduled for hearing on July 8, 1997. We oppose Item #1, approval of specific plan amendment #4 to update plan and to allow new development. The planned changes in density, and most importantly, the planned changes from residential to tourist -commercial zoning are not acceptable to our members who have invested considerable sums of money to develop the surrounding areas, predicated on the general plan, which was for the area to be low or medium density residential. We also oppose items #2 & 3 which again change the number of units allowed per acre by virtue of the density change. Our members predicated their residential purchases and exclusive and expensive home developments on the general plan, which allowed low or medium density residential only. This change will impact the whole community of La Quinta, and should not be allowed. It is unfair to change the zoning after so much of the community surrounding La Quinta Resort has completed its development. Individual homeowners have invested huge amounts of money to complete upscale development. This type of density will negatively impact the existing homeowners. We also oppose item #5; approval of a site development permit, since the density of the area is currently medium density, which means 4-8 units per acre. The proposed density is 10 units per acre. We definitely want this denied, and the density maintained at 4-8 units per acre, as indicated in the general plan. We also want the single-family units to adhere to customary residential standards concerning garages. We do not want the site development permit approved for the health spa, since the area would have to be rezoned tourist -commercial for this, and we oppose strongly the rezoning of residential into tourist commercial. -RT 1 : _o-igs 7_BC1#1 JJL_. 3.1337 3:53;1 1 P-ONE N0. : 433 475 2307 TO, Mr. Jerry Herman La Quinta Planning Commission FROM: Della Davis Mountain Estates Homeowners Association Mailing Address: 102 Grand Ave Capitola, CA 95010 Re: KSL Expansion JUL 0 ` i; ,i 1997 CITY OF LA,CUINTA PLANNING DEPART&4ENT We would like the Planning Commission to deny or postpone the planned expansion that KSL is attempting to fast track through the Planning Commission and City Council. The '.,Public Notice" that was given was sent out at a time when the majority of the homeowners in the developments surrounding the resort are out of town. This does not constitute effective public notice, and in fact only serves KSL's purposes by making sure that no one has an opportunity to effectively investigate the expansion and oppose it if necessary. It is a fact that La Quinta and the desert communities are seasonal towns, and only in the season from November until May are most homeowners in town. They are not available to read letters mailed to them at their La Quinta addresses, and thusly, are not being adequately notified of this expansion. Secondly, the materials referenced in the Public Notice, i.e., the Environmental Assessment and the Planning Commission Staff report are as of this date, July 2nd, still not available for the public to read. Given that these arc lengthy materials, covering many changes, the public is not being given adequate time to oppose or approve the expansion. This is another reason to deny or postpone all actions on their many coning change requests. We ask specifically, that in addition to postponing or denying the requests I through 7, as they relate to flan 121 E, Amendment #4, that all site development permits, 97-607. 91- 605, and the Environmental Negative Mitigation acceptance be denied, until the public has a genuine chance to study the proposed changes. and until the majority of the homeowners in the surrounding developments are aware of the proposed zoning changes. Lastly, the proposed changes are not in keeping with the general plan. KSL is asking that the general plan be changed from residential, low density, to either residential medium density, or worse, to tourist commercial. Changing residential to tourist commercial is not acceptable to members of our association. Our members have invested millions of dollars in real estate development, based on the city of La Quintals general plan, which called for the area at issue to be low or medium density residential, not tourist commercial. Please stop the fast -track tactics of KSL, and give the public an opportunity to voice their opinion. Please decay or postpone until November 1997, any and all action on this proposed .,xpansion. ********Dr. Stuart L. Farber 350 Monrovia Ave Long Beach, California 90803******** Mr. Bubba Lloyd 77313 C:alle Matzatlan La Quinta CA 92253 Dear Bubba: July 2,1997 JUL 1997 I understand from Craig Hammill that you are to represent the Association at the July 8, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. After speaking with Craig I submitted a letter to Mr. Jerry Herman, Director, Community Development Department, City of La Quinta. Because of my work schedule, I am not able to attend the Planning Commission review . Therefore I am requesting that you present my letter to be read and placed into the minutes of the meeting. Attached please find my letter expressing grave concerns over the proposed KSL requests. Thank you in advance for following through with my request. Sincerely, e- �?A )W Dr. Stuart L Farber CC: Mr. Jerry Herman, Director Community Development Department cam (5. Wo s e 2064 Norfork Northfield, IL 60093 3 July 1997 JUL 7 jJ97 Community Development Department City of La Quinta, California 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Gentlemen: As a resident and homeowner at Los Estados (Santa Rosa Cove), I hereby submit my objection to the proposed requests and locations for plan amendments, submitted by KSL Land Corporation. I strongly object to the density they propose for the dwelling units from 2-4/acre to 4-8/acre. In addition, I object to the removal of some of the existing tennis courts, unless there is a plan to replace them -- which does not appear in their application. The addition of 135+ lots (and homes) will create a substantial number of homes in a confined amount of space. This proposal has been discussed many months ago, and I question why KSL did not submit this proposal when most of the active homeowners were in residence. Quinta City Council to deny these requests, and insist Zeir proposal, relative to the number of units and tennis courts. Fernando (Los Estados) Northfield, Illinois 60093 R. K. -lam TEL N0.702+749+5451 Jul C (, zjr' lb : 1 J r. J l We AND CAROL HAM Box 555 GLENBROOK, NV. $9413 July 7, 1997 I L1 1 Planning commission City of La Quinta via Fax: (760) 777-7155 Re: KSL Development Corp Las Casitas Development at La Quinta Resort and Club I have today received KSLDC letter of June 27 describing their plan for the above titled project. As our property at 77-440 Vista Rosa is located at the north and of Obregon, we have a special awareness of the existing traffic problems just outside the Fernando gate to Santa Rosa Cove at the intersection of Fernando and Obregon. 1) In our judgement both Obregon and Fernando are inadequate to handle existing traffic. a) Obregon is too narrow to accomodate 2-way travel, and has no provision for bicycle or pedestrian traffic. b) Fernando, with its center divider, offers no safe passage for pedestrians or cyclists. c) The absence of set -back at the south-east corner of this intersection provides no safe sight line for motorists turning right onto Fernando from Obregon. (Traffic making this turn typically does so without stopping, thereby increasing the danger to pedestrians walking west on the south side of Fernando.) 2) Routing all construction traffic via Fernandu and Obregon will only increase the congestion and unsafe conditions which presently exist. 3) Adding traffic for 40 homes and for a 25,000 sq ft spa and fitness facility will more permanently over -tax these already unsafe and inadequate roadways. 1997 Wide, and in some areas, divided roadways now exist to the project area via the Mazatlan and Fernando gates. Certainly a better design would be to convert all of Obregon from Fernando to Mazatlan to a pedestrian path, and serve the tennis club, spa, and all caritas through the controlled access of the existing gates. Such a redesign would better serve pedestrian travel between the hotel and the club by reducing automobile cross traffic; would better serve residents of the Santa Rosa Cove who could then drive to the club without leaving the cove community; and would eliminate the present unsafe and congested intersection of obregon and Fernando. Thank you for your consideration of these uunmients. inc ly, )be r Ham a "MARKEnNG THE WEST'S FINEST RANCH & RECREATIONAL PROPERnES- JUL 71997 7 L i n - --> ` I qq -7 rnmmi,nity Dpvplonment Department 7 j_antjintq rite Hall 7R-4q5 rallae Tampico I-aOU i nt,3 CA 142253 RP! Soprific Plan 121E. Amendment #4. General Plan Amendment q7-054.. Zone Chance 97-081, Tentative Tract 28545, Site Develcompnt permits <)7-607, 97-608, Environmental Assessment q7-'?4n and Certificate of Appropriatness 97-003. Gprit ipml-n: T =Irn jn,-jlt,,rabIy opposed to thiF Plan For a number of TnnreasPd density of this ar,?;:i woijId result in even MnT*p traffic con<iestion and Problems. The substantial Amount of Activity at I _aQui-Ita Resort as well as additional rP-,iHPntial developments in the immpdiatp wicinity Art- fast ripstrnyinq the ambiance of the area as well as nuttina a hepvv burden on the infrastructure. -7,. As indicated by a �taanant Price level, certainly the rpAj Pqtate market doe- not inHirpte a o-ni—in demand for t-hi- r-a- ronseaupntly. T see no reason other than the Pollertion of additional_ tax revenues accompanied by arpater to the city to iustify increasina the zoning from In.,j i-n medium density on the northeast corner of Calle Mazatlan and Camino Quintana. You made a decision; what rrnmrt- vr:)" to (-hanae it? 11nder #2 & 3. recardinci the 17.6 acres at the SE corner of c-isenhower and 50th.. "And othpr aeneral Plan amendments necessary to accomodate resort uses". This is vaaue and. T believe, aives the Resort narte blanche to do whatever it wishes. 4. Acrordino ro 45 and 6,a 1q,440 nauare foot huildina ,iijnestrilr*eH on the arre-, --'+- ,nth .-; n,-' r ; - r- n h n 14 1- r I -Iced for nAintPn;=1nr-P -clUiPmm-nt both insiri,- and as �,1`11 ^ �mr-,Invr— narkino. T think it is inexcusable to make an eyesore out of tr), p�rtrqnrp pri-q to i-K- I-.,qOIIint=I rniintr\/ rlub andtiantaRosa (-nvn 9-3 well as one of the main avenues into 1-aQuita itself- T likp to know iih\/ 1-90uita Resort -annot -0ntinu,= to ,it-iliL—, *hair creserit 'irca for this nnrr-os-a?- 1515 ARAPAHOE ST., STE 1500 - DENVER, CO 80202 - (303) 534-4822 1 FAX: (303) 534-9021 * WWW-FULLER-WESTERN-COM T+' nr-rn� r- that thi ^ is ion ,�ijr i na the sLIMM-r 1*mm-Hiqt-P -qrp-i are rinne- ,.Ii nt-,,,r --At, her than now so that . M,q in.-; i-v n4 (-nn-t, rl 1(-*t*l ion fan bpin,i hrnliohi- jQ fnr when mn^t of the residnnts [,,Ihv wasn't it rinn- last as KqI_ npveAnc)ment SUOIeStS. hn romrlpt.,--?H in the Off T wnulri inr rely irr_rpriate Your serio1j,!3 (-on,:,;id"ratinn of my nrr)os,it;r%q to this elan -,jne-orr-lv vou Idi rt -r * �7r-_41 I n- I -ni i i r i-,-; (- ".) a -;- -> r, ---) dimmer * -17^>5 F. Flora Pla(-e ni_nkipr r-r) q0_1 WALTER F. FREITAS 002 RODEO ROAD PEBBLE BEACH, CA 93953 _ TELEPHONE 649.1992 AREA CODE 408 July 1, 1997 Community Development Department La Quinta City Han 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quints, CA 92253 RE: KSL EXPANSION Ladies and gentlemen: Enclosed herewith please find a copy of the envelope in which Mrs. Beverly K. Freitag (aka Mrs. Walter F. Freitag) received your NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING in this matter at her primary home in Pebble Beach, California. Please observe the original postmark thereon is darted June 23, 1997 and that the date of forwarding by the La Quints Post Office to Mrs. Freitag at Pebble Beach is dated June 26.1997. That was last Thursday. The letter arrived yesterday, Monday, June 30, 1997. The PUBLIC HEARING is scheduled to commence at 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, July 8,1997, just one week from today. The Fourth of July weekend usually serves as a good time for lawyers, cagtneers and other professional people to get away from their offices for vacations during the specific period chosen for these PUBLIC BEARINGS. This program does not accord with adequately fair and reasonable notice to those whom the law mandates that they be given notice m order that the proceedings comply with the requisites of DUE PROCESS. Unreasonably unfair and inadequate notice equates with NO NOTICE. The legally required notice is not merely to inform that there will be such PUBLIC BEARINGS: it's substantive purpose is to provide those owners with the fair and reasonable opportunity to protect and preserve their homes from illegal, abuse. For preparation for the PUBLIC HEARING of which this mailing gave notice, Mrs. Freitag has four working days, (July 1,2,3 and 7) in order' to become duty informed of what the developer plans to do, and then, if necessary, to engage professional experts to appear in her behalf at the hearing in Is Quinta. Thig N NOT FAIR AND REASONABLE NOTICE necessary for due process of law, and this bow is so raised in behalf of Mrs. Walter F. Freitag, (aka Beverly K. Fntas). It was foreseeable by those charged with the duty of giving to notice that the period between June 2e and July 9& would be, and is, a very popular and common vwAwn time dining which it z most difficult for one to consult and confer with professional persons (attorneys, engineers, etc.) proficient in hearings such as this one Promises to be. Conversely, the instant NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING is too short to allow an interested owner to property prepare to protect and preserve his or her proprietary rights as such owner affected by the prospective proceeding. 4e�4 wafter F. Freitag. ' IUX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 r. 631-361-014 Beverly Freitas ' 77321 Avenida Fernando La Quinta CA 92253-2506 FnEI3V1 Tg2Z533019 1397 06/Db. FREITAS ST loca RODEO RD PEBBLE BEACH CA 93953^87RL 121a3> 2S06 @a 4, 4 July 1, 1997 Community Development Department La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Sirs: JUL 71S97 J� %11ENT I am the owner of a Tennis Villa at 77-347 Avenida Fernando in La Quinta, California, and I wish to comment, prior to the proposed hearing on July 8, 1997, regarding "Specific Plan 121E, Amendment #4, General Plan Amendment 97-054, Zone Change 97-083, Tentative Tract 28545, Site Development Permits 97-607, 97-608, Environmental Assessment 97-340 and Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003". The applicant is KSL Recreation Corporation and it s assigns. I have just received notice of the public hearing on July 8, 1997, and have had a chance to review the brief summary of the proposed action by KSL. My first concern is that I and other homeowners among the Tennis Villas, and in Santa Rosa Cove, will not have nearly enough time to study the proposals, understand them fully, and assess the impact on us as homeowners. While I am not opposed to progress or change, I must say that my first reading caused real concern in thinking of approximately 120 additional units being built in our neighborhood and the increased traffic, increased noise, increased density and congestion that this will cause. When I purchased the property, I understood that I was buying in a neighborhood that was zoned "residential" and not "resort residential". Therefore, please register my objection to the above mentioned specific plan. I would very much appreciate additional information and adequate time to review the data and gain a better understanding of the magnitude of the project. With just several days notice and �;rith the July 4th holiday intervening, I don't feel I will be able to respond in a truly meaningful manner. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. From my standpoint, a delay would be most appreciated. Very s' erely, Roger C. Lindeman, MD Ann Tuttle 1100 Ninth Avenue P.O. Box 900 Seattle, WA 991 I 1 Telephone (206) 223-6955 MR. AND MRS. RoBERT M. Howi-. 21 AUBREY HOUSE 7 vtAIDA AVENUE I.()ND0 N W2lT`FNGLANDI -• -� . .. r 120 7 111 29 June 1997 City Council La Quinta City Hall P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Ladies and Gentlemen: C My wife and I are the owners of a Tennis Villa located at 76-988 Calle Mazatlan in Santa Rosa Cove. The purpose of this letter is to protest the proposed construction of "Time Share units" in our immediate area by the PGA WesVKSL Corporation and to urge you to deny a permit for such construction or deny approval for a zone change from low density to medium density residential. The proposed construction is incompatible with the present character of the neighborhood. It would cause increased noise, parking problems, additional traffic causing severe wear and tear to the roads which we as residents maintain, and security problems. These problems will cause a depression in our real estate values. As long standing members of the Tennis Club, we are also dismayed to see they are requesting removal of ten (10) tennis courts to build still more housing. We are asking your help in protecting our quality of life and our environment. Your consideration of the legitimate rights of all the La Quinta residents and property owners will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Robert M. Howe Althea M. Howe RO-NALD G. EIDELL 1235 N. Astor Street Chicago, Illinois 60610 O - (630) 932-3980 H - (312) 642-0570 Via Facsimile (760) 777-7101 July 7, 1997 JUL 71S97 J Community Development Department and the Honorable Mayor and Councilpersons r+l ;r r �,`: ;E;�T 78495 Calle Tampico LaQuinta, California 92253 Dear Sus: My wife, Nina, and 1 own the tennis villa at 77.317 Avenida Fcmando, LaQuinta. We have only ,gust received correspondence from the City of LaQuinta (Notice of Public Heanng), KSL Development (letter dated June 27, I997) and the Hoard of Directors, LaQuinta Tennis Villas Homeowners Association (letter dated June 30, 1997 together with a blueprint of the proposed development) regarding the public hearing scheduled for tomorrow. Our Board of Directors, as well as others in the affected area, are 41 the process of studying KSL's proposal and engaging counsel to represent one or more of these groups. Given the scope and scale of KSL's proposal, more time to study this matter for those directly affected is most important and is needed. ' All interested parties need to study all aspects of the proposal, including the effect on environmental concerns and laws, security, parking and traffic. The current zoning density for the proposed development has been long - standing and is something we considered when purchasing our tennis villa. While we acknowledge KSL's interests and rights to develop the areas, an increase of the zoning to more than twice its current level appears totally unreasonable. The effects of a change such as that proposed would likely be negatire. dramatic and far-reaching. More time is needed to review this matter and we respectfully request you postpone the July 8, 1997 meeting of the Planning Commission to allow more thoughtful review and discussion of this matter. Thank you. Very truly yours, Eu� Ronald G Eidell RGS:spd Copy via facsimile to Board of Directors, LaQuinta Tennis Villas Homeowners association (760)564-4982 ?0✓ZO'd TOTLLLL6T9T6 01 OZOS 688 80L dd 9b:ST L6. L0 inn JUL 7 '97 :4:45 FROM HLKD ATTY 4083738302 PAGE.002 LAW OFFi= OF HORAN, LLOYD, KARACHALE, DYER, SCHWARTZ LAW & COOK INCORPORATED P.O. Hox !!sa MO:YTERSY. cwiaogxu► 91912asso ,,� � ll� TALNCE P. F.ORAN / 5 DENNIS M- LAV xAN`35P LLOYD July 7, 19 7 iONY T. xAMCKk .E TFIVRV N V. DYFR %RY D. SCHWARTZ TFLBMONF< (44X) )7. -.r}t uARX A. BLG'M FROM SAUNAS- (401) 757415 ARK A O CONNOR FACSIMILE: t4M) 37�"11;2 ;OW S. S AXVA MSRT S. AILNOLD M VIA FAaLVIM §r l M7I01 community Development the Honorable Mayor 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California Department and and Councilpersons 92253 ECEME JUL 0 81997 PLANNINGCITY LAOUINTA DEPARTMENT Re: Specific Plan 121E Amendment 4#; General Plan Amendment 97-054; Zone Change 97-083; Tentative Tract 28545 Site Development Permits 97-607; 97-608; Environmental Assessment 97-340; and Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 Dear Gentlepersons: My wife and I presently own and have owned for the last seven years property at La Quinta Tennis Villas. This communication will manifest our strong disapproval of the proposed specific plan and general plan amendments and the rezoning and CEQA actions referenced above. The proposed actions would significantly effect the entire community adjacent to the proposed project and would have adverse significant environmental impacts on the character of the area, traffic circulation, air quality, water, utilities and quality of life. Said impacts cannot be mitigated to a level of less than significance by any proposed mitigation. To allow this project on a Initial Study (Environmental Assessment) and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is contrary to the California Environmental Quality Act. See California public Resources Code 521080(c); CEQA Guidelines S15070(a); No Oil. Inc. v. Citx of Los Angeles 13 Cal.3d 68, 75, 118 Ca1.Rptr. 34 (1974); Friends of 165 street v. City of Hayward 106 Cal.App.3d 988, 1000-02, Cal.Rptr. 514 (1980). 4" VAN SURSN VAUT SlaN UF.Y. CALIPORDUA 97M JUL 7 '97 14:46 FROM HLKD ATTY 40637363a2 =AGE.003 Community Development Department and the honorable Mayor and Councilpersons July 7, 1997 Page 2 Thank you for your attention to this correspondence. sincerely, L "r nce P. Horan LPH:drI cc: Ira Quinta Tennis Villas Association Office City of La Quinta Planing Commission 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 J U L = 71997 Fir Re: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Specific plan 121E, Amendment #4, General Plan Amendment 97-054, Zone Change 97-97-083, Tentative Tract 28545,Site Development Assessment 97-340 and Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003. Please accept this letter as notice the undersigned will appear before the La Quinta Planning Commission as invited by the Community Development Departments written published notice dated June 17, 1997 to discuss certain matters of utmost importance to the residents and homeowners of Santa Rosa Cove. The approval as it stands violates a previously approved resolution #90-23, item #29, passed by the City Council of La Quinta. That resolution resulted in litigation filed under case number 62732 in the City of Indio, County of Riverside, against La Quinta Joint Venture. As an intervenor, Santa Rosa Cove prevailed and the permanent Emergency Only Gate situated at the southern end of Hotel property, where it joins Santa Rosa Cove property on Obregon, was allowed to remain as ordered by the La Quinta City Council. It is not our desire to relive this nightmare. We partitioned the City Council for a permanent emergency gate at the south end of Obregon where the Hotel property joins Santa Rose Cove Property to assist in controlling traffic that infringed upon our peaceful right of enjoyment to our property. This matter was of such importance to the Homeowners of Santa Rosa Cove that 107 registered voters living in Santa Rosa Cove were in attendance at the meeting. An additional 200 plus had signed a petition requesting the gate in question. Santa Rosa Cove has 336 lots that are covered by our CC&R's behind our gates. As a condition of addressed and mad can be started: e approval we feel the following matters should be a part of The Specific Plan before the project SANTA ROSA COVE ASSOCIATION 19-991 Eisenho we La Quinta, Californi (619) 777-76, Fax:(619) 777-76: :Mailing Addres Post Office Box 1271 Palm Desert, California 922' 1) As a condition to approval, the zoning change from low density to medium density be denied and the current density as recorded be used. The current easement agreement originally filed and recorded are not for medium density occupancy. 2) As a condition to approval, the request for rezoning of .6 acre at the vacant corner of Camino Quintana and Calle Mazatlan be denied as this property sits within Santa Rose Cove boundaries and is part of the original development of Santa Rosa Cove, subject to the CC&R's of Santa Rosa Cove and any construction is limited to current architectural design of the existing units. 3) As a condition to approval, KSL must have a written agreement for gate maintenance , as well as security, with Santa Rose Cove revising the current existing agreement to adjust for the expected increase in the use of our facility, before construction starts. 4) As a condition to approval, KSL must agree that all construction traffic enter and leave the project via Fernando and Obregon at the Northern most intersection of the two. No construction traffic should be allowed to use Mazatlan. 5) As a condition to approval, all property on the site at 50th and Eisenhower, except the area situated for the Maintenance Complex, remain zoned as residential with a planned development or conditional use permit. 6) As a condition to approval, acceptable drainage easements across Santa Rosa Cove Association property must be agreed to by the parties, particularly at the intersection of Calle Mazatlan and Camino Quintana and surrounding area, prior to start of construction. 7) As a condition to approval, KSL must provide access to the Richard Frederick property, the La Casa and all other KSL owned property on Obregon via Fernando and specifically not Calle Mazatlan. This is to include all vehicles, except golf carts, bicycles and pedestrian traffic. This property currently enjoys an easement via Obregon from Fernando. 8) As a condition to approval, KSL agrees that no interference with the physical structure nor intended use of the Obregon Gate will occur, without the specific consent of the Santa Rosa Cove Homeowners Association Board of Directors and the La Quinta City Council. (2) 9) As a condition to approval, KSL agrees that no employees of the Hotel, contract labor, special events labor, contractors, etc., will use the Mazatlan or Fernando Gates as egress to the premi.sses. This does not include Hotel Guests or golf course staff. There is a stacking problem at the Mazatlan Gate brought about when KSL changed the Mountain Golf Course from a highly exclusive private course to a Resort/Public course. This stacking is a serious safety problem, already addressed in a previous hearing before the City Council, resulting in the passage of Resolution 90- 23 calling for a permanent Emergency Traffic Gate at the southern entrance to Santa Rose Cove on Obregon limiting traffic through that gate to emergency vehicles, pedestrian, bicycles, and golf cart traffic only. This was a condition to any further development at Santa Rosa Cove. The conditions that existed prompting this action at that time, regarding traffic at the Mazatlan Gate and inside the gates, is worse now, even before any additional construction starts. We submit that you, as the Planning Commission, must take into account these safety factors when reviewing the Specific Plan before you. The request for rezoning the parcel of land at the corner of 50th and Eisenhower should be considered with the thought in mind that some 250 workers and their vehicles will arrive at around 5:30 AM each day, 7 days a week, breaking the peaceful tranquility of the morning air. They may be behind a nicely decorated wall, but, they will be heard by all homeowners in the immediate area. This scenario will repeat itself at 2:30 PM and 10:30 PM as each shift changes. The undersigned has been asked to represent the Homeowners Association by their current Board. As a past President of the Association I am more familiar with some of the above mentioned events and would welcome the opportunity to answer any questions the Commission might have. espe tively, J s W. "Bubba" L oy 313 Calle Mazatlan La Quinta, Calif. 92253 July 71 1997 (3) cc: La Quinta City Council Honorable Mayor Glenda Holt Jerry Herman, Director, Community Development Department Stan Saba, Planing Department Steve Speer, Senior Engineer (4) Planning Commission City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 July 7, 1997 Stephen Davis La Quinta Homeowners 401 Monterey Avenue Capitola, CA 95010 ECE V E JUL 0 81997 CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE: IKSL Recreation Corp. and its assigns, KSL Land Corp. and its assigns and KSL Desert Resorts, Inc., Requests for Changes Dear (Honorable Planning Commissioner: We are requesting that the Planning Commission postpones all approvals on the plan changes, zone changes, tentative tract changes, site development permits, and environmental assessment certifications that have been applied for by KSL Land Corp., KSL Recreation Corp. and KSL Desert Resorts. The due process rights of the homeowners in and around La Quinta Resort have been violated. It is our right to demand adequate notice as well as to be heard and to have our say in how the land around our homes is used. Giving notice in the summer, in a seasonal town, is denying us our due process. Notice not calculated to actually notify the majority of homeowners is not notice. The Planning Commission must consider the rights of the existing homeowners. We are asking you postpone deliberation on this project because the public has been denied their rights to see the materials being considered in this public meeting. As of Thursday, July 3rd, at the end of the workday, we were not able to acquire copies of the Planning Commission Staff report. The homeowner's due process is being violated; no one could have analyzed the Staff Report or the Environmental Assessment report since they were not available. We have concluded it is inadequate to limit the environmental studies to an assessment. We are asking the Planning Commission to require an Environmental Impact Report and Traffic Study during the high season before approving any Environmental Certification. We demand a traffic study that counts traffic on Fernando and on Mazatlan during the high use season. The entrance to our housing area, the Mountain Estates will be impacted during construction. Crowding will greatly impact the quality of the environment for the existing homeowners who have invested considerable amounts of money into their developments. We ask specifically, that the Planning Commission deny Requests 1 through 7, as they apply to Plan 121 E, Amendment #4, General Plan Amendment 97-0547 Zone Change 97-083, Tentative Tract 28545, Site Development Permits 97-607, 97-608 and as requested from KSL Recreation Corp. and its assigns, KSL Land Corp. and its Assigns, and KSL Desert Resorts, Inc. These requests involve change of zoning and the Homeowner's Association is against the change from low density to tourist - commercial. We want all changes from residential to tourist commercial denied. This change in land use is not acceptable to members of our association. Homeowners have invested significant amounts of money in this area and had a right to assume that the infrastructure was not going to be changed solely to benefit KSL Land Corp. or KSL Development Corp. KSL should reasonably use the land consistent with the general plan. Dense tourist housing is not what the general plan calls for. Homeowners in the Mountain Estates consider this kind of action to be indicative of an intent to defraud by KSL and by the Planning Commission. The homeowners in a city rely on the general plan to communicate to them future use of an environment. Our investments were predicated on the general plan as an integral part of La Quinta's infrastructure. The change of zoning is an abrogation of our rights and we feel there are quality of life issues that may have been fraudulently misrepresented by KSL and possibly the City of La Quinta. If the intention had been to pave over the tennis courts, and change the zoning all along, then unfortunately fraud and disclosure issues will be raised in the next venue available to review KSL's and the City's actions. Sincerely, Steve Davis Planning Commission City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Mountain Estates Homeowner's Associati% J c/o Via Sierra P.O. Box 13315 311 Oakland, CA 9466-2614 IDECEME J U L 0 81997 CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE: KSL Recreation Corp. and Its Assigns, KSL Land Corp. and Its Assigns, and KSL Desert Resorts Request for Changes We request that the Planning Commission postpone any and all approvals on the plan changes, zone changes, tentative tract changes, site development permits, and environmental assessment certifications. The due process rights of the homeowners in and around La Quinta Resort have been violated. It is our right to demand adequate notice of public hearings as well as to be heard and to have our say in how the land around our homes is used. Giving notice in the summer, in a seasonal town, is denying our homeowners our due process. Notice not calculated to actually notify the majority of homeowners is not notice. We are outraged that the Planning Commission would consider approvals of this development when the public has been denied their rights to see the materials being considered in this public meeting. As of Thursday, July 3rd, at 4 P.M. our representative at city hall was not able to acquire copies of the Planning Commission Staff report. The homeowner's due process is being violated, because there was no way, anyone could have studied or analyzed the Staff Report or the Environmental Assessment report because they were not available. We hold that it is inadequate limit the environmental studies to an assessment. We are asking the Planning Commission to require an 'Environmental Impact Report and Traffic Study during the high season before approving any Environmental Certification. The entrance to our housing area, the Mountain Estates will be impacted during construction. Crowding will greatly impact the quality of the environment for the existing To: Planning Commission From: Mountain Estates pg. 2 homeowners who have invested considerable amounts of money into their developments. We ask specifically, that the Planning Commission deny Requests 1 through 7, as they apply to Plan 121 E, Amendment #4, General Plan Amendment 97-054, Zone Change 97-083, Tentative Tract 28545, Site Development Permits 97-607, 97-608 and as applied for by KSL Recreation Corp. and its assigns, KSL Land Corp. and its assigns, and KSL Desert Resorts, Inc. These requests all involve change of zoning and the Homeowner's Association is against the change from low density to tourist -commercial. We want all changes from residential to tourist commercial denied. This change in land use is not acceptable to members of our association. Homeowners have invested significant amounts of money in this area and had a right to assume that the infrastructure was not going to be changed solely to benefit the desires of KSL. KSL should reasonably use the land consistent with the general plan. Dense tourist housing is not what the ,general plan calls for. Homeowners in the Mountain Estates consider this kind of action to be indicative of an intent to defraud by KSL and by the Planning Commission. The homeowners in a city rely on the general plan to communicate to them future use of an environment. Our investments were predicated on the general plan as an integral part of La Quinta's infrastructure. The change of zoning is an abrogation of our rights and we feel there are quality of life issues that may have been fraudulently misrepresented by KSL and possibly the City of La Quinta. If the intention had been to pave over the tennis courts, and change the zoning all along, then unfortunately fraud and disclosure issues will be raised in the next venue available to review KSL's and the City's actions. �, ,Inn NO. -�40 liol `, 08i97 14:83 BURNHAI SECURITIES 917607777101 UW Mr. and Mrs. John P. Rosenthal 1112 Park Avenue New York, New York 10128 July 8, 1997 By rAX; 760/777-7101 H JUL 0 8 1997 L CITY OF LAQUINTA Community Development Dept.o Honorable Mayvr end Counsel Persons PLANNING DEPARTMEN 78-495 Calle Tampico LaQuinta. CA 92253 Sits: ission Pursuant to the proposed KSL zoning change coming before the Planning der t dive the later today, my wife and I hereby request a delay postponement LaQuinta Homeowners Association t' a to studv the project. I own the tennis villa at 76994 Calle Mazatlan, which will be directly affected by the proposed condominium project. ,fl,lank you for your comideration. Sincerely,1,31 J and Jacq ine Rosenthal. IPR:djl PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW 119 RESORT RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND A HEALTH SPA IN THE LA QUINTA RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN AREA CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-607 APPLICANT: KSL DESERT RESORTS, INCORPORATED WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 81" day of July, 1997, hold duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL Desert Resorts, Incorporated, for approval of 119 resort residential units and a 20,200 square foot health spa in the RM Zone (zone change to TC proposed), located between Avenida Obregon and Calle Mazatlan, south of the Tennis Club, more particularly described as: Portion of Section 36, Township 5 South, Range 6 East, WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit request has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended by Resolution 83-68, in that the Community Development Department conducted an initial study (Environmental Assessment 97-340) and has determined that the proposed Site Development Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be recommended for certification; 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 approval of Site Development Permit 97-607: 1. The project is consistent with the General Plan in that units of this type are permitted in the Tourist Commercial designation that exist on part of this property and is proposed for the balance of this property. 2. This project has been designed to be consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code and applicable Specific Plan. 3. Processing and approval of this project is in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act in that an Environmental Assessment has been prepared and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. resopcsdp607 Planning Commission Resolution No. 97-_ 4. The architectural design of the project is compatible with the surrounding development in that it is of architectural design, colors, and materials, and has been recommended for approval by the Historic Preservation Commission. 5. The site design of the project is attractive and well designed and appropriate for the area. Parking has been kept around the perimeter of the site to increase the pedestrian aspect of the project. 6. The landscape design of the project with utilize plants compatible with the existing development. An emphasis on landscaping will reinforce the resort community image and character of the area. 7. The project will not require excessive new signs since it will be a part of the La Quinta Resort and Club. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Site Development Permit 97-607 because it is in compliance with the provisions of Specific Plan 121 E, Amendment #4; 3. That the Environmental Impacts identified under EA 96-340 are binding for this case. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8t' day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: resopcs#607 Planning Commission Resolution No. 97-, JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California resopcsdp607 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW A GOLF COURSE/HOTEL MAINTENANCE FACILITY IN THE LA QUINTA RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN AREA CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-608 APPLICANT: KSL DESERT RECREATION CORPORATION AND ITS ASSIGNS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of July, 1997, hold duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL Recreation Corporation and its Assigns for approval of a golf course/hotel maintenance facility with employee parking in the RL Zone (zone change to TC proposed), located on the south side of 50" Avenue, approximately 210 feet east of Eisenhower Drive, more particularly described as: Portion of Section 1, Township 5 South, Range 6 East, WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit request has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended by Resolution 83-68, in that the Community Development Department conducted an initial study (Environmental Assessment 97-340) and has determined that the proposed Site Development Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be recommended for certification; 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 approval of Site Development Permit 97-608: 1. The project is consistent with the General Plan because the use is supporting the operation of the permitted golf courses and resort within the Specific Plan area. 2. The project has been designed to be consistent with the Zoning Code and applicable Specific Plan, subject to the recommended conditions. 3. Processing and approval of this project is in compliance with the requirements of the California Quality Act in that an Environmental Assessment has been prepared and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been recommended. resopcsdp608 Planning Commission Resolution No. 97-, 4. The architectural design of the project is adequate and compatible materials and colors will oe used. Provided the conditions of approval are complied with, the project will be architecturally acceptable. 5. Provided the conditions of approval are complied with the site design will be acceptable. The revision will lessen the affect of the building location on the nearest residences by moving it to the west. 6. The project landscaping will be compatible with the resort. The recommended conditions will increase the quantity of landscaping and tree sizes. Landscaping will provide visual screening of the on site facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Site Development Permit 97-608 because it is in compliance with the provisions of Specific Plan 121 E, Amendment #4; 3. That the Environmental Impacts identified under EA 96-340 are binding for this case. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8t' day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: resopesdp608 Planning Commission Resolution No. 97- JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California resopcss#608 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-054 TO' THE CITY COUNCIL CASE NO: GPA 97-054 KSL LAND CORPORATION AND ITS ASSIGNS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of July 8,1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL Land Corporation and its Assigns for a General Plan Amendment from RL (Low Density Residential 2-4 Dwellings per acre) to ML (Medium Density Residential 2-4 Dwellings per acre), for approximately .6 acres, at the vacant northeast corner of Calle Mazatlan and Camino Quintana and at the southeast corner of 50" Avenue and Eisenhower Drive or other amendments as necessary to accommodate resort uses, more particularly described as: APN: 631-700-076 through 81, 773-020-021, 026, 029, and 031 WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended), pursuant to the adoption of Resolution 83-68 by the City Council, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an initial study (Environmental Assessment 97-340) and determined that the General Plan Amendment will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is recommended; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, 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 and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said General plan Amendment: This Amendment is internally consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan not being amended in that the Amendment only affects land uses which already exist as a part of the Plan. 3. This Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses will require Planning Commission review and approval of future development plans, which will ensure that adequate conditions of approval. 4. The new land use designation is compatible with the designations on adjacent properties because the Planning Commission review and approval will ensure compatibility and in some areas, the adjacent use is similar due to its resort nature. p:peresgpa97-054 5. The new land use designation is suitable and appropriate for the properties involved because it is an extension of the existing resort or a use commonly associated with the existing uses. 6. The situation and general conditions have substantially changed since the existing land use designations were imposed in that the resort market has created a market for additional rental units and rooms. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 97-054 from MDR to TC for property located between Avenida Obregon and Calle Mazatlan, south of Avenida Fernando, and from LDR to TC for property located at the southeast corner of 50' Avenue and Eisenhower Drive, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as illustrated in the map labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California p:resopcgpa97-054 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE 97-083 (RL toTC) TO THE CITY COUNCIL CASE NO.: CZ 97-083 KSL RECREATION CORP. AND ITS ASSIGNS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of July 8,1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL Recreation Corp. and its Assigns for a Zone Change from RL (Low Density Residential 2-4 Dwellings per acre) to ML (Medium Density Residential), or other appropriate zone(s) at the vacant northeast corner of Calle Mazatlan and Camino Quintana and at the southeast corner of 50" Avenue and Eisenhower Drive, more particularly described as: APN: 631-700-076 through 81, 773-020-021, 026, 029, and 031 WHEREAS, said Change of Zone request has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended), pursuant to the adoption of Resolution 83-68 by the City Council, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an initial study and determined that the Zone Change will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is recommended; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, 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 and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Zone Change. This Amendment and Zone Change is internally consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan not being amended in that the Amendment and Zone Change only affects land uses which already exist as a part of the Plan. 3. This Amendment and Zone Change will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses will require Planning Commission review and approval of future development plans, which will ensure that adequate conditions of approval. 4. The new land use and zone designation is compatible with the designations on adjacent properties because the Planning Commission review and approval will ensure compatibility and in some areas, the adjacent use is similar due to its resort nature. p:pereszc97083 5. The new land use and zone designation is suitable and appropriate for the properties involved because it is an extension of the existing resort or a use commonly associated with the existing uses. 6. The situation and general conditions have substantially changed since the existing land use and zone designations were imposed in that the resort market has created a market for additional rental units and rooms. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Change of Zone 97- 083 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as illustrated in the map labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California resopc.131 P.01 Subject: 50th an TO WH1 When w home wl for buyi "the vie, understa This wot hove a 1' the value the stree You mm golf cout We have have bee since you front doc cracks In There ar propertie take anol over 15 We don't neighborf to disapf Jimmy A. 'onstruetion of Maintenance wilding - S.W.! Corner of i ,ishenower. I 1T MAY CONCERN: loved to the 1.ago s, all the properties surrounding our zoned single family residenc;,d One of the main reasons our home was the peaceful tranquil gei�ghborhood an� of the beautiful Santa Rosa ountains. NIow we you want to change the zone1. g to build a 1�/,000 sq. ft. building and parking across. from our hoit eM be very undesirable and un cceptableH We do not see 10 sq. ft. maintenance building could po�siMy improve J our beautiful home -- especially whenpoll l is located across 'Om us. W c face the street! ave other properties located ithin the con' nes of your to build such a project. ,eady had problems with tra Ic of trucks and buses that .riving by our home and shaking our windor%s and sliders idenedthe goad on 50th. Jt used to go away from our i now t has come closer to op home and has caused it foundation. lso at least 3 families of Roam Runners liviing on the t discussion. Maybe the end rontnental peo�le should look. They have been houi�ng these fanjilies there for ,eciate trying to run this thi out on tour. Therefore, vNE the zoning change. ►res Powell ugh when must ask th I E i I � of our v Council 08 27•97 FRI 16:38 FAX 408 478 0358 KINKOS CAPITOLA Z0n2 June 24, 1997 Chairman Jacques Abel La Quinta Planning Commission RE: Public Hearing on KSL expansion on Ju.y 8, 1997 Della Davis ;iomeowner's Association Mountain Estates La Quinta ,Mailing Address: P.O. Box 13315-311 Oakland, CA94619 We are requesting a continuance of the public hearing scheduled for this date It is a fact that La Quinta is a seasonal resort, and the majority of homeowners who will be affected by these changes are out of town. We object to a public rearing taking place when the public cannot attend. Secondly, the documents outlining their proposed changes (Amendment *4} and the environmental assessment is not available for the public to read, since, according to the planning department, it is not ready yet. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter Sincerely, Della Davis O ECEVE JUN 2 61997 CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT r Date: Mc Csa i x Ub merly Digital 1040081) 6464 185`h Avenue NE, Redmond, WA 98052 FAX COVER SHEET r a "�-' -r �J ' * (Note new area code 5197) Frorn: Eat Howard z,Y*A--I F 425-558-6020 Chairman & CEO P 425-558-8899 P No of pages including cover . � L'a c � � ir'•'S (, r�ra o `tee Z0 ev" rl'z-;:v CJ4 AW2" -e _ -- P &)A tU ,� �QAP- h%eyuz A Z A chi, fay •1r A4 :s ` VA Z Y•-4 - r =G ?-6. 8® 7nr tied tiS? 3NI XIdSOW OE098SSSEV /OC-/97 6:4.:S BURNHAM SECURITIES 4 917605644882 NO.355 D Mr. and Mrs. John Po Rosenthal 1112 Park Avenue New York, New York 10128 gy PAX-. 760l777-7101 July 9,1997 Community Development Dept., Honorable Mayor and Counsel Persons 78-495 Cade Tampico LaOuinta, CA 92253 Sirs: Pursuant to the proposed KSL zoning change coming before the Planning Commission later today, my wife and I hereby request a delay or postponement in order to give the LaQuinta Homeowners Association time to study the project. I own the tennis villa at 76994 Calle Mazatlan, which will be directly affected by the proposed condominium project. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 0J and Jacqu ine Rosenthal JP.R:djl PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JULY 8, 1997 CASE NOS.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-340, SPECIFIC PLAN 121 E, AMENDMENT #4, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97- 054, ZONE CHANGE 97-083, TENTATIVE TRACT 28545, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 97-607 AND 97-608, AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 97-003 APPLICANTS: KSL RECREATION CORPORATION AND ITS ASSIGNS (SP 121 E, AMEND. #4, ZONE CHANGE 97-083, SDP 97-608, AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 97-003); KSL LAND CORPORATION AND ITS ASSIGNS (GPA 97-054); AND KSL DESERT RESORTS, INCORPORATED (TT 28545 AND SDP 97-607). REQUEST AND LOCATIONS: RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT #4 TO SPECIFIC PLAN 121 E TO UPDATE THE PLAN AND ALLOW NEW DEVELOPMENT AND USES FOR THE AREA COMPRISING THE LA QUINTA RESORT, SANTA ROSA COVE, LA QUINTA RESORT GOLF COURSE, ABUTTING TRACTS, AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 50TH AVENUE AND EISENHOWER DRIVE. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FROM RM (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 4-8 D.U. PER ACRE) TO TC (TOURIST COMMERCIAL) FOR APPROXIMATELY 13.2 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AVENIDA OBREGON, SOUTH OF AVENIDA FERNANDO, AND FROM RL ( LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 2-4 D.U. PER ACRE) TO TC (TOURIST COMMERCIAL) FOR APPROXIMATELY 17.6 ACRES AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 50TH AVENUE AND EISENHOWER DRIVE. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP TO DIVIDE APPROXIMATELY 62.5 ACRES INTO 132 LOTS FOR THE AREA ENCOMPASSING THE LA QUINTA RESORT AND CLUB, LOCATED GENERALLY WEST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND SOUTH OF AVENIDA FERNANDO. sp121eperpt ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: GENERAL PLAN/ LAND USE DESIGNATION: RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-607 TO ALLOW REMOVAL OF SEVEN TENNIS COURTS, 18 HOTEL UNITS, EMPLOYEE PARKING, AND MAINTENANCE FACILITIES AND REPLACE WITH 119 RESORT -RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND A HEALTH SPA OF APPROXIMATELY 19,400 SQUARE FEET IN THE AREA GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN AVENIDA OBREGON AND CALLE MAZATLAN, SOUTH OF THE LA QUINTA TENNIS CLUB AND ON THE EAST SIDE OF AVENIDA OBREGON, ACROSS FROM THE TWO EXISTING SUNKEN TENNIS COURTS. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-608 TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A GOLF COURSE/HOTEL MAINTENANCE FACILITY INCLUDING A 19,440 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND PARKING LOT FOR ALL HOTEL AND GOLF COURSE EMPLOYEES ON APPROXIMATELY 6.2 ACRES, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 50TH AVENUE, APPROXIMATELY 210 FEET EAST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO ASSURE ARCHITECTURAL COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN HISTORIC STRUCTURES AND PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION, PURSUANT TO SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION. THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-340 FOR THIS REQUEST PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. THEREFORE, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR CERTIFICATION (ATTACHMENT 1). OPEN SPACE, GOLF COURSE OPEN SPACE, TOURIST COMMERCIAL, WATERCOURSE/FLOOD CONTROL, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) r;1-1 `. 0, -- 0 u lu sp121eperpt ZONING: OS (OPEN SPACE), GC (GOLF COURSE), TC (TOURIST COMMERCIAL), FP (FLOODPLAIN), RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), AND RM (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) BACKGROUND: SITE DESCRIPTION The site consists of 638+ acres in the area generally north of the westerly extension of Calle Tampico and west of Eisenhower Drive along with the southeast corner of 50' Avenue and Eisenhower Drive (see Specific Plan text, P. 2.11). Within this area is a small area of privately owned property which is not a part of this project. The primary use is the La Quinta Resort and Club with 640 rooms and related convention and commercial uses. Other uses consist of Santa Rosa Cove (334 residential units), The Enclave/Mountain Estates (91 custom lots - 59 vacant), Los Estados (40 residential units), Tennis Villas (200 residential units approved - 48 units constructed). Recreational uses consist of a 18 hole golf course and part of a second course, 25 swimming pools, 38 spas, and a tennis club. To the west and north are mountainous areas within the Hillside Conservation Overlay District. The southeast corner of 50' Avenue and Eisenhower Drive is vacant with the exception of two golf holes. PROJECT HISTORY Specific Plan 121E and a Environmental Impact Report (EIR 41) were approved by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors prior to City incorporation. The plan authorized 637 condominium units, 420 hotel units (76 rooms existed), a 27 hole golf course with clubhouse and service facilities on 619+ acres. Subsequent amendments were approved in 1982, 1989, and 1995. The current approval allows 642 hotel units and 1,558 residential units. This total number of units appears to be based on units allowed per acre times the number of acres under the different residential densities. Currently existing are 642 hotel units and 448 residential units plus 59 improved lots in The Enclave for custom homes. The Specific Plan Document provides a detailed description of the above information and other pertinent facts. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting approval of the Amendment to the Specific Plan in order to allow further development of the resort and its related facilities. To allow the development, a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, two Site Development Permits, and Certificate of Appropriateness have been requested. Specific Plan Amendment The Specific Plan Amendment, in summary, sets the proposed distribution, location, and extent of uses of land, utilities and infrastructure covered by the plan, and provides sp121eperpt implementation measures in the form of regulations and standards on a plan and in a text. Prior to this Amendment request, this Specific Plan consisted of a map exhibit without a text. The applicants have prepared this text to provide a complete document. The land use map has been updated to reflect construction to date, as well as show anticipated development of the remaining vacant land and areas scheduled for demolition. The Specific Plan area shows five different planning areas. There are two major areas shown as future development which are under the ownership of the applicant or in escrow. The first (Planning Area 1) is the area generally located between Avenida Obregon and Calle Mazatlan, south of the Tennis Club and on the east side of Obregon, east of the two sunken tennis courts. Demolition of seven tennis courts, two employee parking lots, a maintenance yard, and 18 hotel casitas units is proposed to allow construction of 119 single family "resort residential" units, a new health spa, and a future fitness building adjacent to the tennis club. A description follows in this report. The second area (Planning Area 11) slated for development is at the southeast corner of 50' Avenue and Eisenhower Drive, where a golf course/maintenance facility and additional "resort residential" units are proposed. Planning Area III consists of Santa Rosa Cove (334 of 340 units built to date), Los Estados (built out at 40 units), The Enclave (91 custom lots of which approximately 31 are built), and several golf holes. Planning Area IV consists of the majority of the golf holes. Planning Area V is the mountainous hillsides above 20% slope to the north and west. This area is vacant except for one existing golf hole and one residence. General Plan Amendment The General Plan Amendment proposed would redesignate all properties under the applicant's ownership, or a part of the hotel operations, to TC (RSP) or Tourist Commercial with a residential specific plan overlay. Generally, this change affects the southeast corner of 50t" Avenue and Eisenhower Drive (presently designated Low Density Residential) and the land between Avenida Obregon and Calle Mazatlan south of Avenida Fernando, (presently designated Medium Density Residential) with the exception of the existing Tennis Villas. This includes the northeast corner of Camino Quintana And Calle Mazatlan which contains six vacant "postage stamp" lots that were originally intended to be developed with the remaining six Tennis Villa units. This redesignation of Medium and Low Density Residential to Tourist Commercial will require reducing the maximum residential density allowed within the Specific Plan. Zone Change The Zone Change request follows the General Plan Amendment request, rezoning the redesignated sites to TC (RSP) or Tourist Commercial with a resort residential specific plan overlay. This would consolidate all hotel utilized land into the Tourist Commercial Zone. sp l 2 l epapt Tentative Tract The Tentative Tract Map proposes to subdivide the 62.5 acre hotel property west of Eisenhower Drive, into 132 lots. 119 of the lots would be "postage" sized lots for the "resort -residential" single family units proposed to be constructed. The remaining lots consist of the various hotel and tennis facilities and common areas. The property presently consists of 17 parcels of varying shapes and sizes. The resort -residential lots will provide fee simple ownership lots for future resort- residential owners. These lots will vary in size from 1,321 to 1,791 square feet and include habitable ground space, patios, and balconies. Site Development Permit 97-607 This Site Development Permit will allow the development of a new 20,200 square foot spa and 119 "resort -residential" single family detached units. In order to construct this project, seven tennis courts, a maintenance building, 18 casitas units in six buildings (constructed in the 1960's) and employee parking areas will be removed. The area for this construction consists of approximately 11.3 acres located between Avenida Obregon and Calle Mazatlan, south of the Tennis Club and north of the three tennis villas which front on Camino Quintana and the privately owned residence which fronts on Avenida Obregon and the east side of Avenida Obregon, east of the two sunken tennis courts. The "resort -residential" units are intended to be a housing product which co -exists in the resort environment, as opposed to a typical housing project. The units will be sold to individuals who can put their unit, or any, or all of their bedrooms into the resort pool for overflow short term rentals. Full resort maintenance services will be provided for the interior and exterior of the units. (See Specific Plan text, P.2.12) The majority of the detached units will be provided in 8-unit square clusters with a swimming pool or pool and spa in the center. The remaining units will be in half clusters, or smaller, depending on the area size and shape. The smaller clusters will not have a pool or spa. The units are spaced six to eight feet apart. Proposed are 50 one bedroom units (ground floor or over -parking units 840 or 815 sq. ft.), 52 two bedroom units (1,535 sq. ft.), and 17 three bedroom units (1,900 sq. ft.). Units can be rented in sizes varying from a one sleeping room to a full three bedroom with kitchen. If all bedrooms were used for rentals, 205 rentals would be available based on the proposed unit mix. A portion of the existing Avenida Obregon, which is a private street, will be removed in order to eliminate vehicular traffic through the site and provide a pedestrian connection between the existing hotel and new construction. The street will be cul-da-saced at the sp 121 epapt north end and the south end rerouted to the west where it will access Calle Mazatlan. Vehicular access to this project will be provided from the north end of the street for the units on the east side of Avenida Obregon. An access to this project is shown on Calle Mazatlan, approximately 350 feet north of Camino Quintana for the remaining units, including those adjacent to the southeast corner of the site. The applicants have provided one parking space per bedroom or 205 spaces. The parking is spread out generally around the perimeter of the site. Parking is provided on the west side of Avenida Obregon, across from the remaining sunken tennis court, and adjacent to the south boundary of the site. Parking is provided detached from the units in open or carport spaces. The new units have been designed in an architectural style to be compatible with the original buildings which are described as Spanish Revival in the Historic Resource Evaluation prepared for the La Quinta Hotel and revised by the Historic Preservation Commission (see Appendix II of the Specific Plan Amendment). The structures are characterized by articulated tile roof forms, header trim, wrought iron accents, and other Spanish architectural features. The one bedroom ground floor plan is one story in height (17 feet) with the two and three bedroom units and over -parking one bedroom plan, two stories in height (22 feet). Not all elevations for these units have been submitted for review. The exterior materials and colors will match those used in the hotel area. Building walls will be a smooth finish stucco, cream in color. The roof material will be a mixed red color barrel tile, mudded and multi -stacked. Wood and metal trim will be "La Quinta True Blue". Flooring materials will be satillo tile and stamped pavement in terra cotta blends and earth tones. The proposed landscaping of this area will be a continuation of the existing hotel grounds. Plant materials will be for the most part, lush in appearance, while being relatively water efficient. The residential clusters will be connected by wide walkways, also serving as emergency fire access roads. At terminus points and intersections, plazas of varying size will be provided. The major oval walkways and plazas will be in the area between the resort spa and resort -residential units near the northeast corner of the site. The largest plazas will have a fountain, seating, enhanced paving, and be of a size to accommodate gatherings and celebrations. The L.a Quinta Resort Spa (Health Club) will contain approximately 20,200 sq. ft. of floor space with a landscaped central courtyard and replace the existing 6,000 sq. ft. spa facility. The Spa will be located at the north end of the "resort -residential' replacing the sunken tennis court in the parking lot. A future 3,000 sq. ft. fitness center is shown to the northwest of this Spa, north of the existing tennis pro shop. Approval of this will require the processing of a Site Development Permit. Parking for any patrons who drive to the Spa will be handled by valets at the Spa. Seveny- six parking spaces are shown adjacent to the east side of Avenida Obregon for use by the Spa and Tennis Club. sp 121 eperpt r, The Spa is designed in an architectural style similar to the hotel. Exterior materials and colors will be the same as those used for the resort -residential units. Rectangular horizontal windows will be flanked by shutters. The majority of the structure will be one story in height with a small two story part for office use at the northeast corner of the building. A tower is shown on the east elevation of the building to provide a backdrop for the adjacent large plaza (Plaza Grande). The height of this building is approximately 14 feet -for the one story area, 27 feet for the two story area, and 42 feet for the tower. The exterior materials and colors used for the Spa will be the same as those used for the "resort -residential" units adjacent to the south and east. The landscaping is a continuation of the existing hotel grounds and proposed "resort - residential" units around the Spa. Note that for all elements of this project request, only the landscaping depicted on the preliminary planting plan accurately reflects what is proposed. Site Development Permit 97-608 This Site Development Permit allows construction of a golf course/hotel maintenance facility containing approximately 19,440 sq. ft. of building area on the south side of 501h Avenue, approximately 210 feet east of Eisenhower Drive. This facility would consolidate their current sites, including the one located on Avenida Carranza in the Cove residential neighborhood, into one location. The current employee parking within the hotel area would be moved to this site. The current lots would be replaced by the "resort -residential" units described above. The employees who presently park at the La Quinta Resort Golf Course Clubhouse will continue to do so. The site is a triangular shaped parcel containing approximately 6.2 acres of area with frontage on 501h Avenue. A six foot high block wall exists along the east property line. An east bound bus stop exists on 50th Avenue, near Eisenhower Drive. Land uses surrounding the site are as follows: North: La Quinta Country Club Clubhouse and Residences South: Vacant Residential land and golf course (KSL Property) East: • Duna La Quinta Residences West: Vacant land and Santa Rosa Cove Residences An "L" shaped building is shown near the east end of the site. Approximately 362 employee parking spaces are provided, primarily east and west of the building. The doors to the building will open to the north and east with the area in front of this building secured by a chain link fence when closed. A propane/fuel storage will be provided outside of the east side of the building. Trash dumpsters, material storage, and plant pallette storage will be outside on the south side of the building. sp121eperpt r,L�r,, V J U U Access to the maintenance facility will be from 50" Avenue at two locations. The first will align with the entry to the La Quinta Country Club Clubhouse, approximately 210 feet east of Eisenhower Drive. This entry is shown as a full turning movement access. The second is provided near the south property line and shown with right -in and out and left -in only traffic movements. The north access will connect to a new internal private street running parallel to the southern boundary of the facility. This street will cul-da-sac near the east property line and at its west end, terminate near Eisenhower Drive. It will be extended south to serve a future residential development adjacent to the existing golf holes, south of the facility. Additionally, the south side of the new private street, across from the facility, will be reserved for future residential development. The private street will have two accesses into the facility along its south boundary, one adjacent to each end. Adjacent to the east property line, nine feet from the existing block wall, will be a 12 foot wide path. This path will be used to transport maintenance equipment to the adjacent Dunes Golf Course, which is maintained by the applicants. Additionally, some maintenance equipment using this path may cross Eisenhower Drive at the underpass south of 50th Avenue to reach the golf course adjacent to Santa Rosa Country Club. Employee shuttle service, using the hotels 20-passenger busses, will be provided between the parking lot and new resort ballroom area. A shuttle staging location will be near the west end of the parking lot. These shuttles will only travel north on Eisenhower Drive, turn west on Avenida Fernando, and enter the hotel parking lot and unload next to the ballroom. From this area they will walk, or be transported in carts, to their work stations. Pickup and transportation back to the employee lot will be a reverse of the same route. The only exception proposed is for the employees who work at the Resort Golf Clubhouse who will continue to park in the lot next to the building. The proposed maintenance building will be a metal building with a tile roof and texture coated stucco walls. The roof will be a full roof and utilize clipped gables and no overhang. The building will be approximately 22 feet in height. All man and equipment doors will face north or west. Two air conditioning compressor pads are shown adjacent to the southeast corner of the building. Colors will be similar to those used in the resort residential area. A conceptual landscaping plan for the maintenance facility has been submitted, showing the same plant pallette as that used in the resort residential areas. A six foot high meandering, decorative block or stucco coated wall with pilasters approximately 110 feet apart, is shown along 50th Avenue. A six foot wide sidewalk which matches the meander of the wall is proposed. Along this area, a combination consisting of clusters of canopy or palm trees is shown. Trees are shown in the parking lot area in tree wells and end planters. The balance of the site is shown in a combination of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. Six foot high living fences (chain link fence with vine plantings) are shown on the south sp 121 c papt � v boundary, between the new private road and facility, and between the east entry on 50th Avenue and the building. Along the east property line, which abuts Duna La Quinta Country Club, a 9-10 foot wide landscape planter with shrubs and a few trees is indicated. Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 As part of the environmental assessment review process for these applications, staff required that the entire property be surveyed and documented for historic resources by a qualified architectural historian since the property is listed in the City's General Plan as a historic resource and meet the National Register criteria of being over 50 years in age. That report is contained in the Appendices for the Specific Plan Amendment. It is necessary for a Certificate of Appropriateness to be adopted ensuring that the proposed construction is appropriate for the existing historic structures. PUBLIC NOTICE: This case was advertised in the Desert Sun on June 17, 1997. All property owners within the project area and within 500 feet of the boundaries of the project were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice. As of July 3, 1997,14 letters have been received regarding this project (Attachment 2 ). All correspondence received after this writing will be given to the Planning Commission at the meeting. DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUES (BY APPLICATION): Specific Plan 121 E. Amendment 4 The Specific Plan (SP) Amendment submitted provides a Land Use Map, as well as a text which did not exist before. The SP divides the area covered by the plan into five Planning areas. Only two areas (I and II) are slated for additional development although there are some vacant custom lots, not owned by the applicant, existing in Planning Area III. The SP proposes to provide all Hotel or resort facility land as Tourist Commercial which removes the density of development as a factor for the "resort residential" uses. The hotel grounds between Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Obregon are already designated by the General Plan and zoned Tourist Commercial. The areas proposed for change include the southeast corner of 50th Avenue and Eisenhower Drive (now Low Density Residential 2-4 dwelling units per acre) and proposed to be partially developed with a maintenance facility and other undesignated resort residential use or uses supporting residential. The second area is generally located south of the Tennis Club, between Avenida Obregon and Calle Mazatlan and proposed to be developed with the Spa and 119 "resort residential" units (now Medium Density Residential, 4-8 dwelling units per acre). sp 121 epapt The northeast corner of Camino Quintana and Calle Mazatlan which contains six "postage stamp" lots (owned by the applicants) surrounded by a common area lot (owned by the Santa Rosa Cove Association) is proposed to be changed from Low Density Residential (2-4 D.U. per acre) to Tourist Commercial. Although this area is not proposed to be developed at this time with the adjacent (north) 119 "resort -residential' units, if changed, the hotel or related facilities would have no density maximums. Because of the surrounding non -hotel related residential uses to the east, west, and south, this area should retain its RL (Low Density Residential) Zoning to minimize impacts on the surrounding area. Planning Area V, which includes the hillside areas to the north and west, is not proposed to be developed. However, as allowed in the Hillside Regulations of the Zoning Code, the applicant has noted that the 211+ acres will allow the transfer of 21 dwelling units (1 unit per 10 acres) to be constructed elsewhere in the SP area. Staff is recommending the applicant provide an easement for all the hillside areas as undevelopable open space. The SP in Planning Area V (Hillsides) allows clubhouses and tennis court as a permitted use. "fhe Zoning Code does not permit these uses because of their negative impact. Therefore, they should be deleted from the SP text as allowable uses. With the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change of 27.1 acres from Low and Medium Density Residential to Tourist Commercial, an accompanying decrease in the allowable residential units should occur. This amounts to 74 units based on 18.5 acres of Low Density Residential land, and 69 units based on 8.6 acres of Medium Density Residential land, for a total of 143 dwelling units. Therefore, rather than 1,558 units, a maximum of 1,415 dwelling units (1,558-143) plus the 21 units transferred from the hillside totalling 1,436 units, should be reflected as allowed in the Specific Plan text. General Plan Amendment 97-054 As noted in the above section, the northeast corner of Camino Quintana and Calle Mazatlan should not be redesignated from Low Density Residential to Tourist Commercial. Zone Change 97-083 The Zone Change coincides with the request of the General Plan Amendment. As requested by the applicant, the hotel related properties would change to TC (RSP), with the exception of the northeast corner of Camino Quintana and Calle Mazatlan. Tentative Tract 28545 The Tentative Tract as proposed is acceptable, subject to conditions. n r � sp 121 epapt v v Site Development Permit 97-607 This permit includes the new Spa as well as 119 "resort residential' units which can be placed in the hotel rental pool if the owner wishes. If used for rental purposes, there could be sorne compatibility issues due to noise, size of groups, etc. To minimize such impacts, a six foot high, solid grouted, decorative block wall should be constructed if not already existing, adjacent to or across the street from all non -hotel related residential uses. This would include units adjacent to the Tennis Villas and adjacent to the Santa Rosa Cove units on Calle Quintana and across from the dwellings on the west side of Calle Mazatlan, as well as adjacent to the residence along the south boundary fronting on Avenida Obregon. There are two employee parking areas and a guest parking lot affected by this project. Discussion on the employee parking is included with the following Site Development Permit section. Presently, there are 90 spaces in the guest lot and head -in parking area on the east side of Avenida Obregon , across from the Tennis Club. With this project, only 40 of the parking lot spaces out of 82 will be retained. An additional 22 spaces will be added to the existing eight as head -in spaces on the east side of Avenida Obregon, north of the parking lot. This is a net 14 space loss for this area. However, with the demolition of 18 adjacent casitas units which required 20 spaces, the 76 resulting spaces should be adequate since the new resort residence units will provide their own parking on site based on one space per bedroom. The resort residential units are well designed with all adjacent units having different facades and a variety of architectural features, including different window sizes and shapes. The spa building needs some variety in window styles and shapes to be compatible with the adjacent resort residential construction. All windows are horizontally placed and rectangular in shape with shutters on each side. The submitted Traffic Analysis contained in the Specific Plan Amendment appendices states traffic to this resort -residential project will have vehicular access from the south leg of Avenida Obregon which is being terminated in the project area. Presently, there is an "emergency only" and pedestrian gate across Avenida Obregon, approximately 1,900 feet south of the southern project boundary. The applicant does not have access control of this gate, and since it is for emergency and pedestrians only, vehicles will need to access this area from Calle Mazatlan. Access to the parking lot on Calle Mazatlan will require vehicles to enter through secured gates at either Avenida Fenando or Calle Mazatlan (50th Avenue). Site Development Permit 97-608 The new maintenance/employee parking lot will eliminate many of the negative aspects of the existing facilities in the resort and on Avenida Carranza. On site noise and traffic impacts from employees private vehicles will be reduced, while increasing peak resort related traffic on 50th Avenue. sp121eperpt As required by the General Plan, a noise assessment for this facility has been prepared by the applicant addressing the noise impacts expected on the adjacent existing residences to the east and future residences to the south (See Specific Plan Appendices). The report concludes the CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level or average noise) standards of the City General Plan will be complied with. However, the annoyance potential of the facility from single events such as door slamming, starting and moving of the noisier equipment, is considered significant. This type of noise impact is most often the source of complaints from surrounding owners. Additionally, the storage and dispensing of propane and fuel near the existing residences to the east and future residences to the south creates a potential hazard. Because of the above concerns, at a minimum, the building should be relocated to the west, a minimum 30 foot wide, densely landscaped planter adjacent to the east property line, should be provided, and the existing east property line wall should be raised to 8 feet in height if the adjacent owners of the wall agree. To comply with General Plan guidelines, the meandering wall along 50th Avenue should be placed so that its average setback from the street right-of-way is 20 feet. Furthermore, this wall should be 8 feet in height. This height is consistent with the development standard in the Specific Plan. The traffic impact study, as well as the Public Works Department, recommend the westerly access on 50th Avenue be redesigned to provide a safe turnaround for rejected vehicles. The easterly gated entry on 50th Avenue will be for facility use only and should have a decorative, solid metal gate to minimize noise and provide view restriction. The preliminary landscape plan submitted for this area does not show an adequate quantity of trees along 50th Avenue and along the east property line and should be increased. Trees in this facility should vary between 36"-48" in box size to present an immediate impact. Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 The City Historic Preservation Commission on June 19, 1997, accepted the La Quinta Hotel Historic Resource Evaluation report, subject to conditions. One of those conditions requires that adjacent to structures designated as historic by the evaluation, the new resort residential units shall be one story in height. The plans submitted do not reflect this requirement. Once a plan showing the specific locations of the historic buildings is submitted, the site plan will need to be revised to reflect this requirement. REQUIRED FINDINGS: Specific Plan Amendment 121 E. Amendment 4 The Findings necessary to be made to approve this amendment are as follows: The proposed Specific Plan amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the applicant has applied for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to Tourist Commercial which permits the uses proposed to be developed, provided conditions are met. sp 121 epapt U u v 1 F.. 2. The Specific Plan Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare in that development proposed under the Specific Plan has been designed to be compatible with the surrounding properties and provide for necessary public improvements and infrastructure. 3. The Specific Plan Amendment is compatible with zoning on adjacent properties in that the changes proposed are primarily adjacent to existing resort type uses (e.g. hotel facilities and tennis club) or will result in development similar to other country clubs (e.g. country club maintenance facilities located next to residential uses). 4. The Specific Plan is suitable and appropriate for the property in that the proposed development is an extension of the existing resort or a use commonly associated with the existing use. The proposed development will be reviewed under a Site Development Permit review process at which time project related conditions will be required to mitigate impacts. General Plan Amendment 97-054 and Zone Change 97-083 The findings necessary to be made to approve this Amendment and Zone Changes are as follows: This Amendment and Zone Change is internally consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan not being amended in that the Amendment and Zone Change only affects land uses which already exist as a part of the Plan. 2. This Amendment and Zone Change will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses will require Planning Commission review and approval of future development plans, which will ensure that adequate conditions of approval. 3. The new land use and zone designation is compatible with the designations on adjacent properties because the Planning Commission review and approval will ensure compatibility and in some areas, the adjacent use is similar due to its resort nature. 4. The new land use and zone designation is suitable and appropriate for the properties involved because it is an extension of the existing resort or a use commonly associated with the existing uses. 5. The situation and general conditions have substantially changed since the existing land use and zone designations were imposed in that the resort market has created a market for additional rental units and rooms. sp121eperpt Tentative Tract 28545 The findings necessary to be made to approve this Tentative Tract Map are as follows: The Tentative Map and its design are consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan 121E in that its lots are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. 2. The design of the subdivision or its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat because the area covered by the Map is mostly developed and mitigation measures and conditions will be imposed. 3. The design of the subdivision and the proposed types of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because urban improvements are existing or will be installed based on applicable Local, State, and Federal requirements. 4. The design of the subdivision and the proposed types of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the Public at large, for access through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently exist and access to the resort residential area will be provided to surrounding property owners. Site Development Permit 97-607 The findings necessary to be made to approve this Site Development Permit for 119 resort residential units are as follows: The project is consistent with the General Plan in that units of this type are permitted in the Tourist Commercial designation that exist on part of this property and is proposed for the balance of this property. 2. This project has been designed to be consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code and applicable Specific Plan. 3. Processing and approval of this project is in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act in that an Environmental Assessment has been prepared and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended. 4. The architectural design of the project is compatible with the surrounding development in that it is of architectural design, colors, and materials, and has been recommended for approval by the Historic Preservation Commission. •.i i�1� V 11 1 �L sp 121 epapt 5. The site design of the project is attractive and well designed and appropriate for the area. Parking has'been kept around the perimeter of the site to increase the pedestrian aspect of the project. 6. The landscape design of the project with utilize plants compatible with the existing development. An emphasis on landscaping will reinforce the resort community image and character of the area. 7. The project will not require excessive new signs since it will be a part of the La Quinta Resort and Club. Site Development Permit 97-608 The findings necessary to be made to approve this Site Development for a Maintenance Building/employee parking lot are as follows: The project is consistent with the General Plan because the use is supporting the operation of the permitted golf courses and resort within the Specific Plan area. 2. The project has been designed to be consistent with the Zoning Code and applicable Specific.Plan, subject to the recommended conditions. 3. Processing and approval of this project is in compliance with the requirements of the California Quality Act in that an Environmental Assessment has been prepared and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been recommended. 4. The architectural design of the project is adequate and compatible materials and colors will be used. Provided the conditions of approval are complied with, the project will be architecturally acceptable. 5. Provided the conditions of approval are complied with the site design will be acceptable. The revision will lessen the affect of the building location on the nearest residences by moving it to the west. 6. The project landscaping will be compatible with the resort. The recommended conditions will increase the quantity of landscaping and tree sizes. Landscaping will provide visual screening of the on site facilities. Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 The Certificate of Appropriateness has been deemed acceptable by the Historic Preservation Commission in that they have determined the proposed 119 resort residential units are architecturally compatible with the historic La Quinta Resort Structures, pursuant to the Secretary of Interior Standards for Historic Preservation. sp 121 epupt � 4 CONCLUSION: The applications, subject to the conditions as recommended by Staff, are acceptable. The Site Development Permit applications will provide projects compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- , recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- , recommending approval of Specific Plan 121 E, Amendment #4, subject to conditions; 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- ,recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 97-054; 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- recommending approval of Change of Zone 97-083; 5. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- recommending approval of Tentative Tract 28545, subject to conditions; 6. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- , recommending approval of Site Development Permit 97-607, allowing construction of 119 resort residential units and a health spa, subject to conditions; 7. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- , recommending approval of Site Development Permit 97-608, allowing construction of a maintenance facility/employee parking lot, subject to conditions; 8. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- , recommending approval of Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003, which ensures that the proposed construction is appropriate for the existing historic structures. Attachments: 1. Mitigated Negative Declaration 2. Letters received from surrounding owners sp121eperpt iUUu-ik2 Prepared by: STAN B. SAWA, Principal Planner Submitted by: CHRISTINE DI IORIO, Planning Manager sp121epapt o n 4 THE RESOLUTIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING WILL BE HANDED OUT AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-054 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-607 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-608 'kr� �i5'v''+Ji�t RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-340 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E AMENDMENT #4, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 97-054, ZONE CHANGE 97-083, TENTATIVE TRACT 28545, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-607, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-608, AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 97-003, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SPA AND FITNESS CENTER, MAINTENANCE FACILITY AND EMPLOYEE PARKING LOT, AND 119 RESORT RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHIN THE LA QUINTA RESORT CAMPUS LOCATED WEST AND SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND 50th AVENUE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-340 KSL RECREATION CORPORATION AND ASSIGNS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 8T" day of July, 1997, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by the KSL Recreation Corporation and its Assigns, on the Environmental Analysis for proposed Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #4, General Plan Amendment 97-054, Zone Change 97-083, Tentative Tract 28545, Site Development Permit 97-607, Site Development Permit 97-608, and Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 generally located northwest and southeast of the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and 50th Avenue, more particularly described as follows: A PORTION OF SECTIONS 36 AND 1, TOWNSHIPS 5 SOUTH AND 6 SOUTH , RANGE 6 EAST, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended, Resolution No. 83-63, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Wtial Study (Environmental Assessment 97-340) and has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case, because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the Conditions of Approval, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be filed; and, �t1t�Ui WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make findings to justify the recommendation to the City Council for certification of Environmental Assessment 97-340: An Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (hereinafter "CEQA"), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000, et. Seq.). 2. The City shall balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable adverse environmental impacts prior to project approval; which means that the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. 3. Prior to action on the Project and the Entitlement Approvals, the Planning Commission considered all significant adverse environmental impacts and mitigation measures, and has found that all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts which may be caused by the Project and implementation of the Entitlement Approvals have been lessened or avoided to the extent feasible. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Assessment 97-340 for Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #4, General Plan Amendment 97-054, Zone Change 97- 083, Tentative Tract 28545, Site Development Permit 97-607, Site Development Permit 97-608, and Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 subject to the Mitigation Monitoring Plan and the project entitlement Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUESABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California ATTACHMENT 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Environmental Assessment No. Case Nos.: GPA 97-054 DATE: July 8, 1997 TTM 28545 SP121-E, Amendment #4 SDP 97-607 SDP97-608 CZ 97-083 I. Name of Proponent: KSL DESERT RESORT, INC. Address: 54-140 PGA BOULEVARD, LA QUINTA Phone„ 760-564-1088 Agency Requiring Checklist: CITY OF LA QUINTA Project Name (if applicable) LA QUINTA RESORT CITY OF LA QUINTA Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 /'1 , , ECUP.KSLRESORT II. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. X Land Use and Planning X Transportation/Circulation Public Services Population and Housing X Biological Resources Utilities Earth Resources Energy and Mineral Resources X Aesthetics Water X Risk of Upset and Human Health N Cultural Resources X ,Air Quality X Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance III. DETERMINATION. On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least, 1) one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards; and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a " potentially significant impact" or "potential significant unless mitigated. " AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. Signature Date: July 3, 1997 Printed Name and Title LESLIE MOURIQUAND For: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 3.1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? X (source #(s): b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? X c) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? X d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? X 3.2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? X b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? X c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? X 3.3. EARTH AND GEOLOGY. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? X b) Seismic ground shaking X c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? X d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? X e) Landslides or mudflows? X f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? X g) Subsidence of the land? X h) Expansive soils? X i) Unique geologic or physical features? X Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 3.4. WATER. Would the project result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? X b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? X c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? X f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? X g) Altered direction or rate of glow of groundwater? X h) Impacts to groundwater quality? X 3.5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any air quality standard to contribute to an existing or projected air quality violations? X b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? X c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? X d) Create objectional odors? X r 3.6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? X b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? X c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? X d) Insufficient parking capacity on site or off site? X e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? X f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? X g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? X 3.7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? X b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? X c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? X d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal X pool)? X e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 3.8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? X 3.9. RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, X pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? iv b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? X d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? X e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? X 3.10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? X b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 3.11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? 11 v � uuut- I b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X e) Other governmental services? X 3.12. UTILITIES. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alternations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? X b) Communications systems? X c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? X d) Sewer or septic tanks? X e) Storm water drainage? X f) Solid waste disposal? X 3.13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? X b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? X c) Create light or glare? X 3.14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? X b) Disturb archaeological resources? X c) Affect historical resources? X d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X e) Restrict existing religious of sacred uses within the potential impact area? X 3.15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks of other recreational facilities? X b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? X 4. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the Potential to degrade the quality of the environmental, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? X c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects). X d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated, " describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. vii INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-340 La Quinta Resort Project: Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #4 General Plan Amendment 97-054 Zone Change 97-083 Tentative Tract 28545 Site Development Permit 97-607 Site Development Permit 97-608 Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 Applicant: KSL Recreation Corporation and Assigns 56-140 PGA Blvd. La Quinta, CA 92253 Prepared by: City of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Ca 92253 Leslie Mouriquand Associate Planner July 3, 1997 Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Project Overview 3 1.2 Purpose of Initial Study 3 1.3 Background of Environmental Review 4 1.4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review 4 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4 2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting 4 2.2 Physical Characteristics 5 2.3 Operational Characteristics 5 2.4 Objectives 6 2.5 Discretionary Actions 6 2.6 Related Projects 6 3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 6 3.1 Land Use and Planning 7 3.2 Population and Housing 10 3.3 Earth Resources 11 3.4 Water 16 3.5 Air Quality 19 3.6 Transportation/Circulation 25 3.7 Biological Resources 29 3.8 Energy and Mineral Resources 33 3.9 Risk of Upset/Human Health 34 3.10 Noise 35 3.11 Public Services 37 3.12 Utilities 39 3.13 Aesthetics 41 3.14 Cultural Resources 43 3.15 Recreation 45 4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 46 5 EARLIER ANALYSES 47 Page 2 .J ,j u v 1 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify any potential environmental impacts of the amendment to the Specific Plan which includes Site Development Permits and a Tentative Tract map for the construction of new residential units, a spa and fitness center, and a maintenance yard with employee parking lot within the La Quinta Resort campus. In order for the Applicant to construct these new structures, the following applications must be approved by the City: Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #4, General Plan Amendment 97-054, Zone Change 97-083, Tentative Tract Map 28545, Site Development Permits 97-607 and 97-608, and Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003. In addition, this Environmental Assessment prepared for the above applications must be certified by the City Council. The Specific Plan area located in the City of La Quinta, California, this area includes the La Quinta Resort. campus which is primarily west of Eisenhower Drive, in Section 36 of Township 6 East, Range 5 South, and Section 1, of Township 6 East, Range 6 South, as depicted on the La Quinta 7.5' USGS Topographic Quad Map. The proposed maintenance yard and employee parking lot will be located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50 also within the Specific Plan. The City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency for the project review, as defined by Section 21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Lead Agency is the public agency which has the prinicpal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which may have a significant effect upon the environment. The City of La Quinta, as the Lead Agency, has the authority to oversee the environmental review and to approve the land use designations. 1.2 PURPOSE OF INITIAL STUDY As part of the environmental review for the proposed project, the City of La Quinta Community Development Department staff has prepared this Initial Study. This document provides a basis for determining the nature and scope of the subsequent environmental review for the proposed project. The purposes of the Initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, include the following: To provide the Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the various project applications; To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the project, mitigating adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; Page 3 'v U,��.. To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the project, mitigating adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; To assist the preparation of an EIR, should one be required, by focusing the analysis on those issues that will be adversely impacted by the proposed project; To facilitate environmental review early in the design of the project; To provide documentation for the findings in a Negative Declaration that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment; To eliminate unnecessary EIR's; and, To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. 1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed project applications were deemed complete subject to the environmental review requirements of CEQA in fight of the intended development and potential impacts upon the property and surrounding area. This Initial Study Checklist and Addendum was prepared by Leslie Mouriquand, Associate Planner, for review by the City of La Quinta Planning Commission and certification by the City Council. 1.4 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This Initial Study indicates that there is a potential for adverse environmental impacts for some of the issue areas contained in the Environmental Checklist (Land use and planning, air quality, transportation/circulation, noise, aesthetics, cultural resources). Mitigation measures have been recommended for the proposed project in a Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) which will reduce potential impacts to insignificant levels. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project. An EIR will not be necessary. SECTION 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The City of La Quinta is 31.18 square miles in area located in the southwestern portion of the Coachella Valley, in Riverside County, California. The City is bounded on the west by the City of Indian Wells, on the east by the City of Indio and Riverside County, on the north by Riverside County and the City of Palm Desert, and federal lands to the south. The City of La Quinta was incorporated in 1982. Page 4 ✓ �' O ,i V i% The project site is located in approximately the west -central portion of the City, mostly west of Eisenhower Drive and south of Avenida Fernando. The La Quinta Hotel is located within the project site known as the La Quinta Resort. 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed project site is a portion of a 638 acre combined residential and hotel resort complex nestled in a cove setting below the Santa Rosa Mountains. This cove is a gently sloping alluvial fan with steep hillsides surrounding on three sides. The land included in this project has been inhabited and utilized since prehistoric times. In the early 1920's Walter Morgan purchased the property from the State for the purposes of developing a desert hideaway resort. In 1926, he began construction of the hotel and six cottages called Casitas. Morgan marketed the hotel to the Hollywood celebrities who frequented it for rest and relaxation. Over the years, the resort was expanded with additional casitas, additional golf courses, a landing strip, a stable, swimming pool, and other structures. The 1970's and 80's witnessed considerable expansion with a number of hotel rooms and single family homes constructed in the surrounding area of the Specific Plan. Thus, a majority of the property has been developed. There is no existing development in the hillsides and none is proposed. In 1988 Amendment #2 was approved to construct a maintenance facility and employee parking lot. The third Specific Plan amendment was approved in 1989 for 77 hotel units that were never built. In 1995, another amendment to the Specific Plan was approved to permit the construction of a conferencelballroom facility and rearrange parking facilities. The history of amendments to the Specific Plan includes one approved under Riverside County Jurisdiction, and three approved under City of La Quinta jurisdiction. The proposed amendment subject to this environmental review will be the fourth amendment under City jurisdiction. Today there is a total of 640 guest rooms and suites, with 66,000 square feet of meeting and function space. A retail arcade accommodates visitors and residents and there are three restaurants. There are two 18-hole golf courses and 25 swimming pools, 35 hot spas and a tennis club. 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed Site Development Permits will consist of a new spa building and future fitness building, 119 new single family clustered 1, 2 & 3 bedroom residential units with hotel guest opportunities totaling 205 rooms or "keys", and a new maintenance facility with employee parking lot with 362 spaces. The proposed buildings will operate as new amenities for the resort complex, and in the case of the maintenance facility and employee parking lot, as a consolidated corporation yard and parking facility. Page 5 2.4 OBJECTIVES The objective of the proposed amendment to the Specific Plan is to not only to create new amenities for the resort visitors and residents, and resort -oriented residential units for sale, but also update the distribution, location, and extent of uses covered by the plan, and provides implementation measures in the form of regulations and standards on a plan and in a text. 2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS A discretionary action is an action taken by a government agency that calls for the exercise of judgment in deciding whether to approve a project. For this project, the government agency is the City of La Quinta. The proposed project will require reviews and recommendations of approval by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Planning Commission, and approval by the City Council. The following discretionary approvals will be required for this project: Certification of Environmental Assessment 97-340 Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #4 General Plan Amendment 97-054 Zone Change 97-083 Tentative Tract 28545 Site Development Permit 97-607 Site Development 97-608 2.6 RELATED PROJECTS The project does not have any related projects other than those discussed in this addendum. There have been several plot plan approvals for new buildings and amendments to the Specific Plan over the last twelve years. With on -going development activities at the resort it is likely that there will be additional site development permit approvals required in the future. SECTION 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts, and compatibility with the proposed design of the spa and residences associated with the land use, subdivision design, architectural design, and historic architectural approval of the proposed development. The CEQA Checklist issue areas are evaluated in this addendum. For each checklist item, the environmental setting is discussed, including a description of the existing conditions within the City and the areas affected by the proposed project. Thresholds of significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies, or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G). Page 6 3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, in the eastern portion of Riverside County. The topographical relief in the valley ranges from -237 feet below mean sea level (msl) to about 2,000 feet above msl. The valley is a part of the Colorado Desert region. Surrounding the valley are the San Jacinto Mountains, the Santa Rosa Mountains, the Orocopia Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountains. The San Andreas fault transects the northeastern edge of the valley. Local .Environmental Setting The Specific Plan is located mostly west of the intersection of Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive. A small portion extends to the southeast corner of that intersection. The mountains are steep and rocky, and provide a striking contrast to the relatively flat cove area. Currently there are 640 hotel rooms or suites, two 18-hole golf courses, a commercial arcade, four restaurants, single family homes and custom home lots surrounding the resort campus, a tennis complex, and administrative buildings located on the campus. Only a few small parcels have never been developed within the resort or hillside custom lots and are still vacant. Historically, the resort property has been included agricultural uses, a horse stable, a landing strip, and was the site of a historic lake known as Lake Marshall. The land was also occupied prehistorically, as evidenced by the archaeological sites on the property. The land use and development history for the resort began with the initial approval of Specific Plan 121-E in 1975 by Riverside County Board of Supervisors. This plan allowed the development of 637 condominium units, 420 hotel rooms, a 27-hole golf course, and service facilities on 619 acres. In 1982, an amendment to the specific plan was approved to allow for 279 additional condominium units, 146 new hotel units, and the annexation of 19.23 acres into the specific plan area for the development of the La Quinta Tennis Club and Tennis Villas (200 condominiums) in the central portion of the resort property. This amendment was processed under Riverside County jurisdiction as the City of La Quinta did not incorporate until May 9, 1982. In 1988, the first amendment under City jurisdiction was approved to add a new maintenance facility with employee and overflow parking lot located at the southeast corner of the Tennis Villas area. These facilities were constructed on two long pieces of land, the north parcel to have the maintenance facility and employee parking, while the southerly parcel was developed with 162 parking spaces for the hotel use. In 1989, Specific Plan Amendment #2 was approved to add 77 new hotel units. These units were never built. Page 7 In 1995, Amendment #3 was approved by the City in conjunction with Plot Plan 95-555 for the construction of a ballroom expansion and elimination of designated parking area and replacement with associated parking. On May 14, 1997, the Applicant made application to the City for Amendment #4 to Specific Plan 121-E and related development applications as described in this document. Currently, the La Quinta Resort campus consists of 640 hotel rooms, convention facilities including 60,000 + sq. Ft. of exhibit space, restaurants, office/retail space, two 18-hole golf courses, 25 swimming pools, 38 spas and a tennis club. The Specific Plan currently allows for a total number of 1558 residential units. The gated residential sections of the resort include Santa Rosa Cove - 334 units (6 lots vacant), The Enclave/Mountain Estates - 32 custom units with 59 vacant lots, Los Estados - 40 residential units, Tennis Villas - 48 units built, 200 units approved, and land east of Eisenhower Drive - 110 units potential. A. Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Adjacent land uses and their designations include: Low Density Residential uses to the east, Medium Density Residential to the south, and Santa Rosa Mountains Open Space with a Hillside Conservation Overlay to the north and west. The Specific plan area extends to the city boundary on the west. The existing residential, tourist commercial, golf and open space uses of the resort are compatible with the surrounding land uses. The existing General Plan Land Use designations for the residential resort land uses include Low Density Residential (LDR) with a range of 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre, and Medium Density Residential (MDR) with 4 to 8 dwelling units per acre. Commercial designations include Tourist Commercial. Other land uses include Golf Course, Open Space, and Water Course/Flood Control. The Existing land uses are depicted in Exhibit 5 (Page 2.5) of the Specific Plan document submitted for this project. The proposed General Plan Land Use designations consist of redistributions of the locations, densities, and corresponding acreage. The proposed changes to the land use designations are depicted in Exhibit 6 of the above referenced document. Acreage under MDR will change from 22.5 acres to 5.5 while TC will increase from 43.5 acres to 61.15 acres in Planning Area I. The requested change involves an increase of acreage in the TC (Tourist Commercial) designation with a change from LDR to TC for that area east of Eisenhower Drive and south of Avenue 50 - Planning Area 1I. The proposed land use designation change would serve as mitigation for the proposed development by providing for consistent and compatible land use categories. Existing zoning for the Specific Plan area include RL - Low Density Residential (Planning Area II), and RM - Medium Density Residential (Planning Area 1), TC-Tourist Commercial, GC - Golf Course, OS - Open Space, FP - Flood plain, and HC - Hillside Conservation. The Zoning District boundaries are proposed to be modified in that there would be an increase in the acreage of the TC Zone, RL would be redesignated to TC for the portion of the project site located east of Eisenhower Drive, south of Avenue 50. The proposed changes are depicted in Exhibit 8 of the Specific Plan document.. Page 8 � U V 0 c The proposed zone change is consistent with the proposed land use designations and would serve as mitigation for the proposed development in those specific areas where the zone change is requested, in that there would be consistency with the General Plan land use designations. The current Specific Plan for the resort provides for a maximum of 1558 residential dwelling units on 638 acres of the resort campus that are planned for residential, golf course, and open space uses. There is a mix of densities from 2 to 8 units per acre, with an overall density of 2.4 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Specific Plan amendment would create a unique use category specified as Resort Residential. With the anticipated use of the proposed single family detached residential units as potential hotel rooms that can be rented as "keys", a review of the Tourist Commercial (TC) Zoning District indicates that the purpose and intent of this zone is to provide for the development and regulation of a narrow range of specialized commercial uses oriented to tourist and resort activity. Representative land uses include destination resort hotels, conference -oriented hotels and motels, eating and drinking establishments, accessory retail and personal service shops, and recreational uses. Residential uses in the TC zone include residential as an accessory use, hotels and motels, and timeshare facilities. These uses require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. An interpretation may be made that the potential use of the bedrooms within each residential unit will be as hotel rooms would classify the units as hotel rooms with residential if the unit owner decided to reside in all or part of a unit. The proposed change from MDR & LDR Zoning Designations to TC will reduce the total density permitted from 1558 to 1415, however, density transfers from the Hillside Conservation areas will increase total density by allowing the number of units that could be developed in the hillsides to be developed in the residential or-4'GAesort Residential areas. B. Would the project conflict with applicable environmental plans to policies adopted by agencies with jurisdictions over the project? Less Than Significant Impact. The City of La Quinta has jurisdiction over this project. The primary environmental plans and policies pertinent to this project are identified in La Quinta's General Plan, the General Plan EIR, the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment, and the City's CEQA Guidelines. An EIR was prepared for the original Specific Plan in 1975. Environmental Assessment 95-304 was prepared for a ballroom expansion at the resort which was a part of Amendment #3 of the Specific Plan. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified for that EA. C. Would the project affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? No Impact. No agricultural lands are located on the project site. No impact on agricultural resources or operations will result from the proposed project (Sources: La Quinta General Plan; Zoning Page 9 Ordinance; Site Survey). D. Would the project disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income minority community)? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will involve the demolition of six existing condominium buildings, each with 3 units, in order to construct the new resort residential units. A total of 10,020 square feet will be demolished. Occupancy of the condominium buildings was at resort market -rates which precluded low-income families or individuals. Impact to the physical arrangement of the existing resort will be minimal as the proposed new buildings will allow for the continuing of the existing spatial organization of open spaces and walkways between buildings (Sources: Site Survey; Proposed Site Plan). 3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING Regional Environmental Setting The Coachella Valley is made up of nine cities in the eastern portion of Riverside County with a total population of more than 250,000 people. The current population of the County is 1.38 million (Source: Dept. Of Finance, 1996). Local Environmental Setting La Quinta incorporated in 1982 with a population of 5,260. Fourteen years later, the City has grown to 31.18 square miles with more than 18,931 permanent residents within its City limits. La Quinta's population ranks it sixth largest of the cities in the Coachella Valley. Annual average growth has been approximately 10% in recent years (e.g., 1,000 people/year). The projected population of La Quinta by the year 2000 is anticipated to be 23,000. The average age of a City resident is 32 years. Persons over the age of 45 make up 27% of the City's population. The ethnic composition of the City is 70% White, 26% Hispanic, 2% Black, 2% Asian/Other. The 1990 Census indicates that 81% of the La Quinta residents are high school graduates and 2 1 % are college graduates (Source: Census/Estimates). The total number of housing units in the City is 9,923. Single family housing units make up 68 percent of the available housing stock. The housing unit breakdown is as follows: 6,845 detached single family units, 2,260 attached single family units, 571 multi -family units, and 247 mobile homes. The average number of persons per household is 3.118 (Source: 1997, Dept. of Finance). The number of housing units occupied is 6070, with 38.83% vacant. Median home prices in the City are just below $120,000 (1990 Census) which is consistent with the average for Riverside County but less than other Southern California counties (Source: La Quinta Economic Overviews). Page 10 U� JUaiJ It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City are used by seasonal residents (Source; Community Development Department, City of La Quinta). A Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed resort residential units will generate additional residents to La Quinta, however, the anticipated vast majority of occupants of these units will be tourists staying at the hotel. It is not anticipated that a significant number of permanent new residents will result from this project that will cumulatively impact regional or local populations. Typically, people buying into this type of project are among the high income individuals, usually older, with grown children no longer living at home. Often they will be seasonal residents, as opposed to permanent residents. Temporary construction -related jobs will be created as the new units and other buildings proposed for this project are built. New permanent or temporary jobs will be created as a result of the project. There may be new jobs created for administration, management, attendants, and specialist for the spa and fitness center. For the new maintenance facility and employee parking lot, there may be some new positions created, however it is anticipated that the existing staff will move to the new facility. The proposed resort residential units may create some jobs for domestics, gardeners, and hotel staff The number of new jobs created by this project is not known. New jobs will benefit the community, and result in a positive impact. New jobs will have an impact upon employee parking and vehicle trips which will be considered in the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan for the resort. B. Would the project induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed new buildings are within an existing developed resort campus. All infrastructure is existing. Connections to existing main lines will be required. No significant impacts are anticipated for this issue. C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? Less Than Significant Impact. It is proposed that six condominium buildings, each with 3 units, will be demolished in order to make room for the new resort residential units. The condos are a part of the hotel room stock and not individually owned or leased for long term occupancy. Thus, there is no impact upon the City's stock of permanent occupancy housing stock and housing needs. 3.3 EARTH RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta has a relatively flat, but gently sloping topography, except for the steep, rocky mountains to the south and west. The Cove area of La Quinta is located on an alluvial fan. Elevations Page 11 reach 1,400 feet above msl. and to below sea level in the southeastern portion of the City. Slopes on the valley floor are gently, except in areas of rolling sand dunes and sand shadows. The alluvial soils that make up the Cove area are underlain by igneous -metamorphic rock, as seen in outcrops in the Santa Rosa Mountains and the Coral Reef Mountains. Soils on the valley floor are made up of very fine grain unconsolidated silty sands. The entire valley is underlain by hundreds of feet of Quaternary fluvial, lacustrine, and aeolian soil deposits (Source: Southland Geotechnical 1996:6). Local Environmental Setting The area where the project site is located is in a historical part of the City. A review of historical aerial photographs indicates that a part of the site was farmed at one time. Elevations on the project site range fi-om approximately 60 to 40 feet above msl (Source: TT 28545, USGS La Quinta Quad). Approximately 207.5 acres are designated as Open Space and are located in the steep rocky mountains at the western, southwestern, and northern boundaries of the property. There are two inferred earthquake faults, one located approximately 2 miles south of the resort property, and the other, approximately 1.5 miles east. There has been no recorded activity along these fault lines, thus there is a low probability for such activity to occur. The City of La Quinta lies in a seismically active region include the San Andreas and Mission Creek faults located several miles to the north and west. The project lies within Groundshaking Zone III with Zone 12 being the most hazardous (Sources: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan; La Quinta General Plan; La Quinta, MEA). According to the Soil Survey of Riverside County, California, Coachella Valley Area, prepared by the USDA Soil Conservation Service in 1979, there are seven different types of soils present on the resort property. These include Ip - Indio fine sandy loam, Is - Indio very fine sandy loam, GbA - Gilman fine sandy loam, MaB - Myoma fine sand, CcC - Carrizo stony sand, Ru - Rubble land, and GeA - Gilman silt loam. Each of these soil types has distinctive characteristics and land use suitability. The Is (Indio very fine sandy loam) soil type is found on the relatively flat areas where the propsed spa and fitness buildings and new resort residential units are proposed. This soil type belongs to the coarse -silty, mixed (calcareous), hyperthermic Typic Torrifluvent taxonomic class. Runoff is slow, and the risk of wind or water erosion is slight. The best use of this soil type is for agriculture, such as truck crops. For construction purposes the shrink -swell factor is low. The risk of corrosion of uncoated steel is high, but for concrete it is low (Source: USDA Soil Survey). The Ip (Indio fine sandy loam) soil type is found in the vicinity of the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50. This soil type belong to the same taxonomic class as does the Is soil type. Runoff is slow, erosion hazard from wind or water is slight. Blowing sand hazard is moderate. The water table is 6 feet or below in depth. This soil type is best suited to agricultural uses. The shrink - swell factor is low. The risk of corrosion for uncoated steel is high, but for concrete it is low (Source: USDA Soil Survey). Page 12 0 n , J1 The GbA (Gilmore fine sandy loam) soil type is found on the northern and southern portions of the flatter resort areas on slopes of 0 to 2 percent. This soil type belong to the coarse -loamy, mixed (calcareous), hyperthermic Typic Torrifluvent taxonomic class of soils. This soil type is subject to flooding. The water table is 6 feet or below in depth. Runoff is slow, erosion hazards are slight, however, blowing sand is moderate. The best land use for this soil type is agriculture. Shrink -swell factor is low. Corrosion risks for uncoated steel are high, but for concrete it is low (Source: USDA Soil Survey). The MaB (Myoma fine sand) is found in areas with 0 to 5 % slope in the northwest corner of the resort property. This soil belongs to the nixed, hyperthermic Typic Torripsamment taxonomic class. Runoff is very slow, erosion is slight. The best use for this soil type is agricultureal uses, however it is suitable for homesites and recretion uses. Blowing sand hazards are high. Shrink -swell factor is low. Corrosion risks for uncoated steel are high, but for concrete it is low. Cut banks will cave in shallow excavations (Source: USDA Soil Survey). The CcC (Carrizo stony sand) soil type is found on slopes 2 to 9 percent in grade, on alluvial fans where drainage from the mountain enters the valley. This soil type belongs to the snady-skeletal, mixed hyperthermic Typic Torriothent taxonomic class. Runoff is slow except in channels. The best land use for this soil type is for watershed and wildlife habitat. The shrink -swell factor is low. Risk of corrosion of uncoated steel is moderate to high, but for concrete it is low (Source: USDA Soil Survey). Rubble land (Ru) soil type is found on slopes with 2 to 15 % grade, on very old alluvial fans. It is composed of 90% cobbles, stones, and boulders, cut by numerous ill-defined intermittent stream channels in a braided pattern. Riverwash is found alongside the main drainageways among the steep slopes. Desert Varnish is found on the exposed surfaces. Vegetation is an extremely sparse cover of brush, creosote bush, barrel cactus, bush sunflower, ocotillo, and an occasional clump of annual grass in the pockets of fine sand. The best land use for this soil type is watershed, wildlife habitat, and recreation (Source: USDA Soil Survey). The GeA (Gilman silt loam) soil type is found on slopes with 0 to 2 % grade and has a slit loam surface layer. This soil type belongs to the same taxonomic class as does GbA soil type. Runoff is slow and erosion hazards are slight. The best land use for this soil type is for growing citrus, dates, cotton, and alfalfa hay. The shrink -swell factor is low. Corrosion risks for uncoated steel are high, but for concrete it is low (Source: USDA Soil Survey). The CsA (Coachella fine sandy loam) is found in areas with 0 to 2 % slopes. This soil type belongs to the sandy, mixed hyperthermic, Typic Torrifluvent taxonomic class. It is found on the parcel where the proposed maintenance building and employee parking lot are proposed at the southeast corner of the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50. Runoff is medium, and erosion hazards are slight. Blowing sand hazard is moderate. The best land use for this soil type is for truck crops. Shrink - swell factor is low. Corrosion risk for uncoated steel is high, but for concrete it is low (Source: USDA Soil Survey). Page 13 The site of the proposed spa and fitness buildings, and the resort residential units has been graded and compacted in past years in anticipation for construction that did not take place. Over time this same area has been used for soil borrowing and depositing from adjacent construction projects. It is estimated that the soil has been disrupted to a depth of about 10 feet. A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: fault rupture? Less Than Significant Impact. There are two inferred earthquake fault lines in the southern area of the City. One fault is located approximately 1.5 miles south of the resort. These faults are considered potentially active, although no activity has been recorded for the last 10,000 years. A major earthquake along the fault would be capable of generating seismic hazards and strong groundshaking effects in the area. None of the inferred faults in La Quinta have been placed in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. Thus, no fault rupture hazard is anticipated for the project site (Source: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan, City of La Quinta General Plan; City of La Quinta. Master Environmental Assessment). B. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed new development will be subject to groundshaking hazards from regional and local earthquake events. The proposed project will bring prople to the site who will be subjected to these hazards. The project site is within Groundshaking Zone 111. The new structures will be required to meet current seismic design and construction standards to reduce to risk of structural collapse. C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project site is not anticipated to be subject to ground failure hazards from earthquake or other events. The La Quinta General Plan indicates that the project site is not within a recognized liquefaction hazard area. The majority of the City has a very low liquefaction susceptibility due to the fact that ground water levels are generally at least 100 feet below the ground surface. D. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: seiche or tsunami or volcanic hazard? No Impact. The City is located inland from the Pacific Ocean and would not be subject to a tsunami. There are no active volcanoes in the local area to create a hazard. E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving landslides or mudslides? Page 14 .J V�r lLL2.,r No Impact. The proposed building sites are several hundred feet from the steep mountains to the west, thus there is no possibility of landslides or mudslides. The existing structures within the Specific Plan are on a gently sloping alluvial fan. F. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will require grading and trenching for the various buildings. Geotechnical reports will be required to be submitted to the City Engineering Department for review prior to issuance of grading permits. The Applicant states that grading will total 14.9 acres which is divided into 7.6 acres for the Maintenance facility, .8 acre for the proposed Spa building, and 6.5 acres for the resort residential units. G. Would the project result in or expose poeple to potential impacts involving subsidence of the land? No Impact. The project site is not located in an area which is considered to have subsidence hazards, according to the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (MEA). Dynamic settlement results in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated soils mix with perched groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground (Source: La Quinta MEA). H. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils? Less Than Significant Impact. The underlying soils on the project site Is - Indio very fine sandy loam, and Ip - Indio fine sandy loam. Both soil types are characterized by slow runoff, slight erosion hazards from either wind or water, and no flood hazards associated with them. The shrink -swell capacity is low, indicating that these soil types are stable for construction considerations (Source: USDA Soil Survey). The City requires compliance with the Uniform Building Code and the recommendations of a soils investigation report prior to issuance of building and grading permits. I. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving unique geologic or physical features? Less Than Significant Impact. The Coral Reef Mountains and the Santa Rosa Mountains represent unique; geologic features in the La Quinta area. These unique geologic features are not located within the project site or near enough to the project to be affected by the proposed spa and fitness buildings, maintenance building or employee parking lot, or the new resort residential units. Page 15 3.4 WATER Regional Environmental Setting Groundwater resources in the La Quinta area consist of a system of large aquifers (porous layer of rock material) and groundwater basins separated by bedrock or layers of soil that trap or retain groundwater. La Quinta is located above the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin which is the major supply of water for the potable water needs of the City as wellas a significant supply for the City's nonpotable inigtion needs. Water is pumped from the underground aquifer via eleven wells in the City operated by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). La Quinta is located primarily in the lower Thermal Subarea of the groundwater basin. The Thermal Subarea is separated into the upper and lower valley sub -basins near Point Happy Ranch, located southwest of the intersection of Washington Streetand State Highway 111. CVWD estimates that approximately 19.4 million acre feet of water is stored within the Thermal Subarea which is available for use. Water supplies are also augmented with surface water from the Colorado River transported via the Coachella Canal. The quality of water in the City is highly suitable for domestic purposes. However, chemicals associated with agricultural production in nearby areas and the use of septic tanks in the Cove area affect groundwater quality. Groundwater is of marginal to poor quality at depths of less than 200 feet. Below 200 feet, water quality is generally good and water depths of 400 to 600 feet is considered excellent. Percolation from the tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the Santa Rosa Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial recharging of groundwater will be a requirement in the near future as more demands for water are placed on the supply. Surface water in La Quinta is comprised of Colorado River water supplied via the Coachella Canal and stored in Lake Cahuilla; lakes in private development which are comprised of canal water and/or untreated ground water; and the Whitewater River and its tributaries. The watersheds in La Quinta are subject to intense storms of short duration which results in substantial runoff. The steep gradient of the Santa Rosa Mountains accelerates the runoff flowing in the intermittent streams that drain the mountain watersheds. One of the primary sources of surface water pollution is erosion and sedimentation from development construction and operation activities. Without controls total dissolved solids (TDS) increase significantly from the development activities. The Clean Water Act requires all communities to conform to standards regulating the quality of water discharged into streams, including stormwater runoff. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) has been implemented as a two-part permitting process for which the City of La Quinta is participating in completing permitting requirements. Page 16 �.+JO�Zx:► Local .Environmental Setting The Environmental Impact Report prepared in 1974 by Harry H. Schmitz & Associates for the La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club, states that the Lower Coachella Valley receives imported water from the Colorado River and is primarily used for agricultural purposes. This water has little importance to the Upper Valley, with the noted exception of La Quinta. In La Quinta this flow moves into the area from the north and northeast, and no groundwater barriers have been identified in this locality. Groundwater recharge comes from these subsurface inflows enhanced by seepage of applied irrigation water from the Coachella Canal. Practically all water used in La Quinta is obtained from wells located within the community. The domestic water system serving the older part of the community was operated by the Santa Carmelita Water Company. The first golf and condominium development was served by the La Quinta Water Company. Now, the entire City is served by the Coachella Valley Water District. There are still a few large private wells used for irrigation and agriculture within the community. The proposed project sites do not have standing water on them. The nearest stands of water consist of several small lakes on the golf courses. Historically, there was a lake at the southern end of the property known as Lake Marshall. The lake dried several decades ago. La Quinta is protected from storm water runoff by a stormwater system designed by Bechtel for the Coachella Valley Water District to protect currently developed and potentially developable areas of the City from damage during a major rainflood event. The system project was based on a flood control plan for the general area developed in 1970. Construction of the system was completed in November 1986. The nearest stormwater facility to the project sites is the Oleander Reservoir which is located south of the resort property and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel which passes through the southeastern portion of the resort property. A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed new buildings including the residential units will decrease absorption rates and amounts in that foundations and hardscape will be placed where there was previously none, except for where the condominium buildings that are slated for demolition and the tennis stadium are located. Pavement for the proposed maintenance yard and employee parking lot will decrease absorption rates in that area. Drainage patterns are designed to direct runoff to the existing golf course lakes. The new buildings are not anticipated to alter the drainage pattern significantly as they will be located amidst existing buildings with an established drainage pattern. B. Would the project result in exposure of people or property to water -related hazards such as flooding? Less Than Significant Impact. The project sites are within Zone X on the Federal Flood Insurance Page 17 rate maps. 'Lone X includes those areas determined to be outside of the 500-year flood plain. The area is protected from stormwater flows by a system of channels and dikes, and may be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. Local stormwater drainage requirements for this site are the responsibility of the City (Source: CVWD). C. Would the project result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? Less Than Significant Impact. Runoff from the proposed new buildings including the residences will be required to be directed into the existing drainage facilities. Water discharging from the proposed spa building is anticipated to be proximal to swimming pool or jacuzzi water. Spas are regulated by the Public Health Department and will be monitored by resort staff in accordance with Health Department requirements for appropriate chemical maintenance and sanitation (Source: Application materials). D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? No Impact. There are no bodies of surface water on the proposed project sites. Existing drainage facilities are located south of the resort property and include the golf course lakes. Runoff water is designed to flow into the lakes and Oleander Reservoir. Flooding occurs rarely so that there is anticipated to be little change in the amount of surface water in the vicinity (Source: Application materials). E. Would the project result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have any substantial natural bodies of water or rivers. There are many small man-made lakes and ponds on golf courses within the City. A few agricultural reservoirs are still in use. The La Quinta Evacuation Channel is a man-made stormwater diversion channel that is usually dry except for runoff from seasonal storms. The future development of the project sites will not affect to a significant degree any existing drainage corridor (Source: Site Survey, Application materials). F. Would the project result in changes in quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or by excavations? No Impact. Water supply in the City is derived from groundwater and supplementary water brought in from the Colorado River. Development of the proposed buildings and units does not include any new wells or cuts into the aquifer (Source: Application materials). Page 18 G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? No Impact. The proposed project will not have a significant effect on groundwater wells as there is not proposed alteration to the rate or direction of flow of groundwater supply by any aspect of the construction or operation of the spa and fitness buildings, maintenance yard, or the resort residential units (Source: Application materials). H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality? Less Than Significant Impact. Several of the proposed buildings will be constructed in an existing resort campus, with six condominium buildings and a tennis stadium, tennis courts, maintenance facility and parking area to be demolished in order to make room for the spa and fitness buildings and the new resort residential units. Some vacant land will be part of this development as well. The maintenance yard and employee parking lot will be constructed on vacant land. The proposed development does not include any cuts into the groundwater supply, nor does it include any operational activities that would impact the quality of the groundwater (Source: Application materials). 3.5 AIR QUALITY Regional Environmental Setting The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and in particular the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB). SEDAB has a distinctly different air pollution problem that the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). A discussion of the jurisdictional organization and requirements is found in the La Quinta MEA. The air quality in Southern California has historically been poor due to the topography, climatological influences, and urbanization. State and federal clean air standards established by the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are often exceeded. The SCAQMD is a regional agency charged with the regulation of pollutant emissions and the maintenance of local air quality standards. The SCAQMD samples air quality at over 32 monitoring stations in and around the Basin. According to the 1989 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan, SEDAB experiences poor air quality, but to a lesser extent than SCAB. Currently, the SEDAB does not meet federal standards for PM 10 are frequently exceeded. PM 10 is particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter that becomes suspended in the air due to winds, grading activity, and by vehicles on unpaved roads, among other causes. The AQMD has defined Criteria Pollutants of concern in SCAB and the Coachella Valley. These pollutants consist of lead, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, PM 10, sulfate, and visibility. There are national, state, and regional levels for almost all of the pollutants. There are standards for ozone and PM 10 at the Coachella Valley level. For the other pollutants the high level of governmental standards must be referred to as indicated in Table 3-1 - Criteria Pollutants of Page 19 Concern in SCAB and Coachella Valley, of the Draft SCAQMD CE A Air Quality Handbook. Primary pollutant sources and primary health effects of lead, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, and PM 10 are as follows: Pollutants Lead (Pb) Sulfur Dioxide Primary Sources Contaminated Soil Combustion of sulfur -containing Fossil fuels. Smelting of sulfur - Bearing metal ores. Industrial Processes. Primary Effects* Impairment of blood function and Nerve construction. Behavioral And hearing problems in children. Aggravation of respiratory diseases Reduced lung function Irritation of eyes Reduced visibility Plant injury Deterioration of metals, textiles, Leather, finishes, coatings, etc. Carbon Monoxide Incomplete combustion of fuels and Reduced tolerance for exercise Other carbon -containing substances, Impairment of mental function Sch as motor vehicle exhaust, natural Impairment of fetal development Events such as decomposition of Death of high levels of exposure Organic matter Aggravation of some heart diseases Nitrogen Dioxide Ozone Fine Particulate Matter (PM 10) Motor vehicle exhaust High temperature stationary com- bustion, atmospheric reactions Atmospheric reaction of organic Gases with nitrogen oxides in Sunlight Stationary combustion of solid fuels Construction activities Industrial processes Atmospheric chemical reactions Page 20 Aggravation of respiratory illness Reduced visibility Reduced plant growth Formation of acid rain Aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases Irritation of eyes Impairment ofcardiopulmonary function Plant leaf injury Reduced lung function Aggravation of the effects of gaseous pollutants Aggravation of respiratory and cardio- Respiratory diseases Increased cough and chest discomfort Soiling Reduced visibility * Source. Table 3-2 Draft SCAQMD Air Quality Handbook Local Environmental Setting The City is located in the Coachella Valley, which has an and climate, characterized by hot summers, mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and low humidity. Variations in rainfall, temperatures, and localized winds occur throughout the valley due to the presence of the surrounding mountains. Air quality conditions are closely tied to the prevailing winds of the region. The City of La Quinta is subject to the SCAQMD AQMP, a plan which described measures to bring the SCAB into compliance with federal and state air quality standards and to meet California Clean Air Act requirements. The General Plan for the City contains an Air Quality Element outlining mitigation measures as required by the Regional AQMP. In addition, the type of development proposed by the amendment to the Specific Plan would be covered by the La Quinta General Plan EIR Statement of Overriding Considerations in that this type of development is needed to further enhance the quality of life sought as essential and beneficial in attracting new residents, business, and visitors to La Quinta and generally promoting increased investment and return on property values. The City is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes two air quality monitoring stations, one located in the City of Palm Springs and one in the City of Indio. The Indio station monitors conditions which are most representative of the La Quinta area. The station has been collecting data for ozone and particulate matter since 1983. The Palm Springs station monitors carbon monoxide in addition to ozone and particulate matter and has been in operation since 1985. A. Would the project violate any air standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Implementation of the proposed three component (resort residential, spa and fitness center, and maintenance facility with parking lot) project would result in long-term direct and indirect air pollutant emissions. Direct emissions would be generated by the use of motor vehicles and natural gas appliances. Indirect emissions are generated by the generation of electricity. No wood burning emissions are proposed except for residential fireplaces. Emissions from motor vehicle operation are anticipated to result in the greatest long-term air quality impact associated with development of the proposed project. The three building components of the Specific Plan have been analyzed together as well as individually for potential impacts to air quality. To provide an analytical equivalent it was determined that the proposed residential units are similar to resort hotel rooms. The threshold of resort hotel rooms is 193 rooms before significant impacts are present. The applicant is proposing 205 rooms which exceed the threshold for impacts. Page 21 The proposed spa building was compared to a medical office with the threshold set at 69,000 square feet of floor space before air quality impacts are considered significant. The total square feet proposed for the spa building is 20,000 square feet. There will be no significant air quality impacts from this building. The proposed fitness building will have 3,000 square feet and has been compared to a racquet club due to the gymnasium nature of the fitness building. The threshold for racquet clubs is 111,000 square feet. The two buildings combined will have 23,000 square feet, much less than either threshold used for comparison. The proposed maintenance facility and employee parking lot has been compared to a bulk terminal (where there are large trucks, loading docks, and various types of equipment) for which all sizes of this kind of facility are considered to have significant air quality impacts. The maintenance facility will serve to store a variety of gasoline and diesel powered tractors, trucks, and maintenance equipment, plus serve as the employee parking lot with a capacity for 362 vehicles. Thus, the proposed 20,000 square foot maintenance building and 362 space parking lot will impact the local air quality. The Applicant proposes to shuttle employees from the proposed parking lot to the main resort campus. In addition the proposed demolition of the six condominium buildings and tennis courts and the grading necessary for the three building components might create significant particulate matter (PM 10) which will impact the local air quality. It is possible that the condominium buildings, which were built in the 1960's, might have asbestos in them that will need to be properly handled and disposed of during the demolition Mitigation might be necessary to bring high levels of PM 10 to less than significant levels. Temporary construction emissions will be created during the construction of the three component project which would vary daily depending on the type of activity and equipment used. Emissions will be generated during demolition, grading, framebuilding, and other construction activities. A computerized screening analysis was used to assess the short-term construction -related emissions. This analysis determined that the three component project would generate 42.7 lbs./day of ROG, 627.4 lbs./day of Nox, 138.4 lbs./day of CO, and 44.8 lbs./day of PM 10. Nox emissions exceeded the threshold for SEDAB which are 100 lbs./day. The following construction emission mitigation measures will reduce Nox emissions: 1. Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference. 2. Provide temporary traffic control during busy construction periods to improve traffic flow. 3. Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow to off-peak hours. 4. Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. 5. Prevent construction trucks from idling longer than two minutes. 6. All construction equipment shall be maintained to prevent visible soot from reducing light transmission through the exhaust stack exit by more than 20 percent for more than 3 minutes per hour and use low -sulfur fuel as required by SCAQMD regulation. To mitigate for the over-all air quality impacts that may result for the project, the following SCAQMD mitigation measures will be required: Page 22 Best Available Mitigation Measure for Construction: 1. Low emission on -site mobile equipment (tractor, scraper, dozer, etc.) Will result in an approximate 60% emission reduction efficiency. 2. Energy use - use electricity from power plants or clean fuel generators rather than temporary diesel powered generators. This will reduce emissions by 50 to 98%. 3. Furtive dust from roads - Pave construction roads that have a traffic volume of less than 50 daily vehicle trips to reduce fugitive dust by 90 to 99%. Best Available Mitigation Measures for Operation Activities: Residential energy use: 1. Use; solar or low emission water heaters for a 40% emission reduction. 2. Use; central water heating systems (emission reduction not quantified. 3. Use; built-in energy efficient appliances for a 10 to 20% emission reduction. 4. Building orientation should be to the north for natural cooling (efficiency not quantified). 5. Provide shade trees to reduce heat for a 55% energy reduction. 6. Use energy efficient and automated controls for air conditioners for a 30% energy reduction. 7. Use double -glass paned windows for a 20% energy reduction. Spa/Fitness Center and Maintenance Facility: Construction phases: 1. Implement on -site circulation plan in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing (emission reduction not quantified). Operation phase: 1. Use energy efficient low sodium parking lot lights for a 55% energy reduction. 2. Use lighting controls and energy efficient lighting for a 60 to 75% energy reduction. 3. Require recycling bins in addition to trash bins and contract for recycling services. 4. Increase walls and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements for a 5 to 9% energy reduction 5. Use light colored roof materials to reflect heat. 6. Use building materials that do not require use of paints and solvents for an 80 to 100% emission reduction. 7. Provide dedicated parking spaces with electrical outlets for electrical vehicles. Other contributors to air quality impacts include vehicular emissions from vehicles during the construction of the three project components. Vehicular emissions from the new residents and hotel Page 23 visitors and patrons of the spa and fitness center will impact air quality. Mitigation for air quality impacts associated with this project will include of the creation of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan that will incorporate several measures such as car and van pooling for employees, shuttling of employees around the resort campus, recycling programs, the promotion of energy efficiency for residential and commercial appliances, and other indirect source reduction measures. The TDM plan shall be prepared by a qualified TDM plan preparer and submitted to the City for review and approval in accordance with Section 9.180 of the Zoning Code. Mitigation for construction -related activities, such as grading and demolition, which generate PM 10, and gaseous emissions, shall be contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for this project. B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Sensitive receptors include schools, day care centers, athletic facilities, playgrounds, residences, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, and other land uses that include concentrations of individual recognized as exhibiting particular sensitivity to air pollution. A radius of 1/4 mile for sensitive receptors is the AQMD standard for consideration of this issue. Within this radius, the land uses surrounding the three buildings include residential, hotel, open space, and tourist commercial, and athletic facilities. The residential and athletic facilities constitute sensitive receptors. Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) are designed to protect that segment of the public most susceptible to respiratory distress or infection, referred to as "Sensitive receptors." C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any change in climate? Less 'Chan Significant Impact. There are no significant climatic changes anticipated with the proposed development within the resort. The three proposed building areas are located within an existing resort development that is located within a desert cove at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The cove is oriented toward the east and is protected from the prevailing winds from the west. The resort does not have any activities or land uses that would alter the climatic factors in any significant or detectable manner (Source: Application materials; site survey). D. Would the project create objectionable odors? No Impact. The proposed three building areas are not anticipated to result in any detectable odors, such as those from restaurants, chemical products, or stockpiling of waste materials. However fertilizers and fuels may be stored at the Maintenance facility that will have to be monitored for odors that would be either distasteful or hazardous to nearby residents (Source: Application materials). Page 24 JLIVV�d�i 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Regional Environmental Setting La Quinta is a desert community of over 18,600 permanent residents. The City is 31.18 square miles in size, with substantial room for development. The existing circulation system is a combination of early roadwork constructed in the 1930's by Riverside County and new roadways since incorporation of the City in 1982. Ivey roadways include State Highway 111, Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, Eisenhower Drive, Avenues 50 and 52. Traffic volumes in La Quinta experience considerable seasonal variation, with the late -winter, early spring months representing the peak tourist season and highest traffic volumes. There is a relatively low incidence of automobile accidents at the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50. The La Quinta MEA states that for the year 1988 to 1989, there were 6 reported accidents at this intersection. For 1995, there were two reported accidents, and in 1996, there were four reported accidents. Thus far, for 1997, there have been three reported accidents for this intersection (Sources: La Quinta MEA; SWITRS; Public Works Department records). Existing transit service in La Quinta is limited to three regional fixed -route bus lines operated by Sunline, Transit Agency. One bus route along Washington Street connects Eisenhower and Avenue 50 with the Cove and Village areas with the community of Palm Desert to the West. Two lines operate along Highway 111 serving trips between La Quinta and other communities in the desert. There are only a few existing pedestrian, bicycle, and equestrian facilities in La Quinta, however, these systems will be expanded as the City grows. These facilities, both existing and future, are designated in the La Quinta General Plan. Local Environmental Setting The proposed project is an update to the La Quinta Resort Specific Plan.The Specific Plan area is located on the west side of Eisenhower Drive, and at the southeast corner of the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50. The resort is accessed at Avenida Fernando, north of Avenue 50, and at. the main entrance located at Avenue 50. There are traffic signals at both Avenue 50 and Avenida Fernando, on Eisenhower Drive. Both Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50 are designated as Primary Arterial roadways. Each street has a right-of-way width ranging between 100 and 110 feet. The La Quinta MEA states that as of June 1991 the average daily traffic flow along Eisenhower Drive, north of Avenue 50, was 9,800; and south of Avenue 50, it was 7,900. Along Avenue 50 the average daily traffic count was 3,500. The La Quinta General Plan lists roadway deficiencies within the City. The area in the vicinity of the project site has a lack of road shoulders and sidewalk facilities to support alternative modes such as bicycling and pedestrian movement throughout most of the system. Page 25 The proposed amendment will permit the consolidation of three existing parking areas for the hotel and landscape maintenance staff into a single new parking lot. The proposed new lot will have 362 parking spaces which will replace the fragmented 215 spaces in the three existing parking areas. The three existing parking areas are located in sensitive surroundings. The existing golf course maintenance staff currently drive through the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Montezuma and pass through an existing residential neighborhood each day before 5:30 AM to reach the unpaved parking area and maintenance building at the terminus of Avenida Caranza. The hotel employee and landscape maintenance two parking lots can only be accessed by driving through the intersection of Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Fernando and traveling south along Avenida Obregon, passing through the La Quinta Hotel grounds (Source: Endo Engineering, June 1997). Access for the residential area located south of the proposed maintenance facility would be off of Avenue 50, directly across from the main entrance to the La Quinta Country Club. A detailed discussion of this future residential area is found in the Endo Engineering Traffic Analysis (June 1997) prepared for this project. Access to the proposed residential units within the hotel grounds will be via Avenida Obregon and Avenida Mazatlan off of Avenida Fernando which intersects Eisenhower Drive. A center portion of Obregon within the resort area will be vacated to form a cul-de-sac at the resort residential units. A. Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? Less Than Significant Impact. The traffic analysis prepared for this project concludes that a total of approximately 490 daily trip -ends are projected to be associated with the proposed consolidated parking lot in the propsed maintenance facility on a typical weekday, with 31 inbound and 3 outbound trips during the morning peak hour and 8 inbound and 29 outbound trips during the evening peak hour of adjacent street traffic. These trips will be permanently re-routed from three existing parking areas, a process that will reduce traffic volumes along some existing site access routes while increasing traffic on other routes in the study area. The trip generation forecast for the proposed changes in residential, hotel and spa uses on -site includes an increase of 2,710 daily trips. Of that total, 321 trips will occur during the evening peak hour (185 inbound and 99 outbound) and 209 trips are projected to occur during the morning peak hour (52 inbound and 157 outbound). The redistribution of project -related traffic will reduce employee traffic volumes on two-lane streets through existing residential neighborhoods and La Quinta Hotel guest accommodation areas but increase employee traffic volumes along Avenue 50 (a four -lane divided primary arterial that is a designated truck route). Construction of additional residential units will increase traffic volumes through the internal streets of the La Quinta Resort including Calle Mazatlan, the La Quinta Hotel main access, Avenida Fernando, and Avenida Obregon. Page 26 All three of the existing key intersections (Avenida Fernando at Eisenhower Drive, Avenue 50 at Eisenhower Drive, and Avenue 50 at La Quinta Country Club entrance) will provide LOS B or better operation (acceptable levels of service) in 1998 with or without the proposed project. The peak hour levels of service provided at all three existing key intersections will be the same upon project buildout as they are today (LOS A or LOS B). Although the fourth key intersection (Avenue 50 at the eastern employee access to the proposed parking area) does not exist today, the peak hour LOS at that intersection after the proposed project is completed will be LOS A. All of the key intersections evaluated currently operate, and will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service with or without the project. Although the proposed project would create a minor change in the Year 1997 peak hour intersection delay (up to 0.1 second/vehicle), the change would not be sufficient to change the levels of service at any of the key intersections. The traffic report recommends mitigation measures to reduce potential circulation impacts associated with the proposed project. These mitigation measures will be incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the project Conditions of Approval. Following the implementation of the mitigation measures, as stated in the traffic study associated with the proposed Amendment #4 to the La Quinta Resort Specific Plan will have a less -than -significant impact on all roads and intersections within the study area. B. Would the project result in hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact. There are no identified safety hazards with the road design or accesses by the proposed project. No off -site improvements are required to achieve adequate levels of service at the key intersections under year 1998+ project conditions (Source: Endo Engineering, June 1997). C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? Less Than Significant Impact. The traffic report prepared for this project does not identify inadequate emergency accesses. A detailed discussion of access issues is provided in the traffic report (Source: Endo Engineering, June 1997). D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on site or off site? No Impact. The proposed spa and fitness buildings do not have specific parking spaces provided because the patrons of these two buildings will largely be the hotel guests whose parking will be already provided by general guest parking facilities. However, there will be 76 parking spaces available to share with other hotel users. The proposed resort residential units will have one parking space per bedroom which will provide Page 27 rl r r J uIJU adequate parking space for these units. These spaces will be located around the clusters of units. The proposed maintenance and employee parking facility will have 360 parking spaces on the 6.2 acre facility. The hotel currently has approximately 200 employees. Additional employees will probably be added to the staff as a result of the spa and fitness buildings and the new resort residential units (maids, gardeners, security, management, etc.).The proposed 360 spaces should provide adequate parking for proposed and future needs for many years. The traffic report concluded that the new maintenance facility with employee parking on Eisenhower and Avenue 50 will replace the 215+ off-street parking spaces that currently exist in three separate parking areas associated with the La Quinta Resort. In addition, the project will relocate a resort hotel and golf maintenance facility building (currently located at the terminus of Avenida Caranza) into the proposed parking lot (Source: Endo Engineering, June 1997). E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? Less Than Significant Impact. Eisenhower Drive is a designated bikeway corridor. The proposed project: is not anticipated to have a significant impact upon the corridor other than to possibly add additional bike riders as a result of the proposed resort residential units or employees. The corridor will not be altered in any manner, thus there should not be any impacts. The proposed new buildings within the resort campus may result in some additional bicycle riders. There are no anticipated hazards or barriers proposed that would affect bike riders. There are existing pathways within the resort that accommodate bikeriders (Source: Application materials; site survey). Avenue 50 is designated as a Class II Bike Route. Required street improvements for the south side of Avenue 50 will include an eight foot sidewalk which will be for pedestrians and bicyclists (Source: La Quinta Bike Route Plan). F. Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed employee parking lot inside of the maintenance facility will provide 362 parking spaces for the resort employees. The Zoning Ordinance requires entities with 100 or more employees to prepare a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to mitigate impacts from numerous vehicular trips and congestion. The resort has over 200 employees for which the proposed parking lot will service. The new parking lot will consolidate parking into one facility. Employees will park in the facility and be shuttled to and from their work posts within the resort via a single drop-off point. A bus turnout is proposed along Avenue 50 in front of the maintenance facility for employees and visitors to the resort to access for public transportation. Bicycle racks will be required to be located within the parking facility for employees to secure their bicycles. The proposed spa and fitness buildings will be required to have bicycle racks provided for both employees and guests. Bicycle racks are required for commercial land uses, and the spa and fitness Page 28 buildings will be in the Tourist Commercial Zoning District. The proposed resort residential units will not be required to have bicycle racks as they will function as a residential land use even though they will be within the Tourist Commercial Zoning District. The resort has an on -site bicycle rental facility that rents bicycles to guests of the resort, thus there are existing bicycle parking facilities throughout the resort. G. Would the project result in rail, waterborne, or air traffic impacts? No Impact. There is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. There are no navigable rivers or waterways, no air travel lanes within the City limits. Thus, there will be no impacts upon these issues. The closest airports are the Bermuda Dunes Airport, a small private facility located just south of Interstate 10, approximately six miles north of the project site. The other airport is the Thermal Airport, located approximately six miles southeast of the project, on Airport Boulevard in the Thermal area (Sources: La Quinta MEA; USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map; site survey). 3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta lies within the Colorado Desert. Two ecosystems are found within the City: the Sonoran Desert Scrub and the Desert Transition. The disturbed environments within the City are classified as urban or agricultural. A discussion of these ecosystems is found in the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment. Regionally, there are numerous desert animals that have adapted themselves in many ways to cope with the desert environment. Animal species found and known to exist in the Valley are widely diversified in both population and number of species. These animals include about three dozen mammals. Many of which will utilize several or all of the different habitats found in the region. They include bats, rabbits, rodents, coyotes, foxes, skunks, bobcats, and the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. The bighorn inhabit the Sant Rosa Range and foothills lying to the southwest of the Coachella Valley. Tracks and occasional sighting of these animals occur in the Indian Wells, Palm Desert, and La Quinta areas. There are numerous amphibians and reptiles in all habitats of the Lower Sonoran ecosystem. They include the toads, tortoises, lizards, and snakes. Countless numbers and species of birds have been frequenting the Coachella Valley during seasonal migrations for centuries. In addition, there are numerous species of permanent resident birds in the desert. The more noticeable one include quail, hawks, doves, roadrunners, hummingbirds, wrens, mockingbirds, warblers, finches, and sparrows. Insects and arthropods typically found in the desert include scorpions, crickets, grasshoppers, spiders, beetles, butterflies, bees and a host of others which have adapted to the environment (Source: La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club Environmental Impact Report, July 1974). Page 29 Local. Environmental Setting The project site is located within the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem. Typically, undeveloped land in this environment is rich in biological resources and habitat. This ecosystem is the most typical environment in the Coachella Valley. It is generally categorized as containing plants which have the ability to economize water use, go dormant during period of drought, or both. Cacti are very common in these areas due to their ability to store water. Other plants root deeply and draw upon water from considerable depths. The variations of desert vegetation result from differences in the availability of water. The most dense and lush vegetation in the desert is found where groundwater is most plentiful. The Sonoran Scrub areas are considered habitat for a number of small mammals and birds. These animals escape the summer heat through their nocturnal and/or burrowing tendencies. Squirrels, mice and rats are all common rodent species in this environment. The Black -tailed hare is a typical mammal. Predator species found in this area include kit fox, coyote, and mountain lion in the higher elevations. The largest mammal found in this area is the Peninsular Big Horn sheep which is found at the higher elevation of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountain ranges. Birds and amphibians./reptiles can also be found in the Sonoran Scrub ecosystem. The resort property is largely developed. Historically, horse stables, a landing strip, or agriculture has been present in areas where there are structures or golf course today. Only small parcels within the resort campus have not been disturbed by some sort of land use activity over the 70 years since the resortwas first constructed. The southeastern corner of Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive has been previously disturbed by grading and excavation activities connected with the construction of the golf course in that area. A. Would the project result in impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The mountains located along the north, west and southwestern portions of the resort property are within the habitat of the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep., and the; possible habitat of the Magic Geko. The relatively flat areas of the resort property are within the habitats of the Black -tailed Gnatcatcher and the Coachella Valley Fringe Toed Lizard. The California Ditaxis, a rare plant, has also been reported in the general area (Source: La Quinta MEA). Field surveys were conducted during August and September 1973 for the La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (July 1974). The summary of field notes indicates that flora species observed included Ink Weed (Suaeda Torreyana), Mesquite, creosote, salt cedar, Alkali Goldenbush (Happlopappus acradenius), Coyote Melon (Curcurbita Palmeri), Cattle Spinach, Wild Tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), Catclaw, Burrobush, Indigo Bush, and Desert Sweet. In addition, the resort property supported a variety of agricultural plants and trees including citrus, dates, and fields of alfalfa. Page 30 Reptiles observed during the surveys included Barred Collared Lizard, Fringe -footed (sic) Lizard (Umavnornata), Gridiron Lizard (Callissurus d. draconoides), Flat -nosed Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma platyrhinos calidarum), Tiger Whip -tail (Cnemidodophorus tigris), Stansbury's Uta (Uta stansbu.riona), Desert Iguana (Dipsosaurus d. dorsalis), Long-tailed Uta (Uta graciosus), Giant Scaley Lizard (Scalaporus magister). Other lizards not observed, but thought to be present on the property include; Mearn's Cliff Uta (Pertosaurus mearnsi), Henshaw's Spotted Night Lizard (Xantusia hensha.wi), Tuberculte Gecko (Phyllodactylus tuberculatus), and Banded Gecko. Snakes not observed, but thought to be present include Desert Mountain Speckled Rattler, Van Denburgh's Night Snake (Trimorphodon vandenburghi), Red Diamond Rattler (Crotalus ruber), Red Racer, and Bull Snake. Avian fauna observed were the California Ground Cuckoo (Geococcyx californianus), Gambel or Desert Quail, House Finch or Linnet, White -winged Dove, Mourning Dove, Mexican Dove, Mockers, Starlings, English, Sparrows, White-rumped Shrike, and Grasshopper Falcon. Others known to frequent the area include swallows, Swifts, Warblers, Thrushes, Flycatchers, Hummingbirds, Orioles, and Texas Night Hawk, Western Tanager. These birds all follow the Coachella Valley Flyway northwestwardly out of the Valley for more northern climes. Mammals observed on the site included coyote, Round -tailed Ground Squirrel, Antelope Ground Squirrel, Pocket Gopher (a variety of Thomomys bottae), Jack Rabbits, and skunks. Nocturnal mammals would include Desert Pack Rat (Neotoma lepida) Canyon Mouse, Cactus Mouse, Spiny Pocket. Mouse, Long-tailed Pocket Mouse, and many bats of large and small species. A rare Ring- tailed Cat (Bassariscus astutus) or Cacomistle was observed. The possibility exists that the Desert Bighorn Sheep may visit the ridges of the Santa Rosa foothills west of La Quinta and western limits of the project site (Source: La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club EIR, July 1974). Insect fauna observed on the property included Wood -borers belonging to the family Buprestidae, genus Hippemelas, Sand Wasp (Epibembix melanoaspis), Coachella Valley Eye Gnats (Hippelates collusor Townsend), Desert Grasshopper (Trimerotropis pallidipennis), Saltbush Grasshopper (Ancorua integra), Ateloploides elegans a rare grasshopper, Robber or Assassin Fly (Caratotainiops) (Source: La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club EIR, July 1974). The Peninsular Bighorn Sheep are listed as rare by the California Fish and Game Commission, s status which corresponded to their federal listing as a threatened species. They are found on the rocky slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains south and west of La Quinta. Some sheep have been observed feeding in the bajada south of the village of La Quinta and sheep tracks have been observed near the Cove Reservoir. Portions of the State Game Refuge 4-D, established in 1917 by the State Legislature primarily for the protection of native bighorn sheep, lie within La Quinta. Other endangered and threatened wildlife species found in La Quinta is as follows: Coachella Fringe -Toed Lizard Flat -Tailed Horned Lizard Page 31 n ri n , ,UU6� ,J Peninsular Bighorn Sheep Coachella Giant Sand Treader Cricket Prairie Falcon Golden Eagle Vermillion Flycatcher Black -tailed Gnatcatcher Crissal Thrasher Le Conte's Thrasher Through that past 70 years, the resort property has been impacted by expansion of new buildings and residential units, additional golf courses, and amenities that have resulted in the disappearance of habitat. Of the faunal and flora species discussed in this document, the species of concern are the Coachella Fringe -Toed Lizard, Peninsular Bighorn Sheep, Black -Tailed Gnatcatcher, Magic Gecko, and California Ditaxis. There are no other known biological surveys to have been conducted on the resort property since the 1973 survey. Based upon the information contained in the EIR and the La Quinta MEA, it appears that there is a potential impact to the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep whose habitat includes the mountainous areas of the resort property. Any proposed recreational intrusion into those mountains would potentially impact the sheep. The Open Space designation prohibits any type of development, including trails, in the mountains without an approved Conditional Use Permit. If the Applicant should decide to include recreational activities or facilities in the mountainous areas of their resort, a complete biological study would be required to be submitted to the City with an application for a Conditional Use Permit. Consultations with California Fish and Game, U. S. Fish & Wildlife, and other appropriate entities would be consulted as part of the review process. Mitigation for the Fringe -Toed Lizard consists of the payment of a mitigation fee used toward the purchase and maintenance of preserve lands. The resort property is not within the designated fee payment area. Thus there is no required mitigation for this species. The Black -tailed Gnatcatcher, Magic Gecko, and California Ditaxis do not currently have any required mitigation measures. In the near future there may be a mitigation requirement in connection with the completion of the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan. B. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? No Impact. There are no locally designated biological resources within the City of La Quinta. All significant biological resources are designated by the California Department of Fish & Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Source: La Quinta MEA). C. Would the project result in impact to locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? Less Than Significant Impact. There are eight locally designated natural communities found on Page 32 i 1 /' (i J l/,D J. or near the project site. The La Quinta MEA identifies these habitat types which are described in terms of their decreasing elevation and development. These habitats consists of the Rocky Slope Habitat:, Rocky Bajada Habitat, Terraces, Alluvial Plain Habitat, Sandy Wash Habitat, Dunes Habitat, Valley Floor Habitat, and. Modified and Agricultural Habitat. The La Quinta MEA lists the La Quinta Hotel as being within the Modified and Agricultural Habitat. There is no perceived impact to flora or fauna from the proposed project, and as such, there is no requirement for mitigation. D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? No Impact. There are no wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal pools within the City (Source: La Quinta MEA). E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? No Impact. There are no known wildlife corridors within the project area (Source: La Quinta MEA). 3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta contains both areas of insignificant and significant Mineral Aggregate Resources Area (SMARA), as designated by the State Department of Conservation. There are no known oil resources in the City. Major energy resources used in the City come from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), Southern California Gas Company, and gasoline companies. There are no oil wells or other fuel or energy producing facilities on the project site or in the near vicinity. The project site is located within MRZ-3, a designation for areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data. A. Would the project conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have an adopted energy plan. However, the City does have a Transportation Demand Management Ordinance (Section 9.180 of the Zoning Code) in place that focuses on the conservation of fuel. The Housing Element contains requirements for efficiency in housing construction and materials, thus reducing energy consumption. The proposed structures will be required to meet Title 24 energy requirements in their construction. No other mitigation is required for this issue. B. Would the project use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? Less Than Significant Impact. Natural resources that may be used by this project include, air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, metals, and other resources needed for construction. Any landscaping will also be required to comply with the landscape water conservation ordinance as Page 33 well as the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District for water management. 3.9 RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH Regional Environmental Setting Recent growth pressure has dramatically increased the City's exposure of hazardous materials. Such exposure to toxic materials can occur through the air, in drinking water, in food, in drugs and cosmetics, and in the work place. Although large scale, hazardous waste generating employment is not yet located within La Quinta, the existence of chemicals utilized in dry cleaning operations, agricultural operations, restaurant kitchen cleaning, landscape irrigtion and exposure to large scale electrical facilities may pose significant threats to various sectors of the population. Currently, there are no sanctioned hazardous disposal waste sites located in Riverside County, although transportation of such materials out of and through La Quinta takes place. Local .Environmental Setting In order to comply with AB 2948-Hazardous Waste Management Plans and Facility Siting Procedures, the City of La Quinta adopted Ordinance 184 consisting of a Hazardous Waste Management Plan. The project site is not known to have been used for any type of manufacturing in the past. A. Would the project involve a risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemical, or radiation)? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. There is risk from cleaning chemicals and compounds used in the maintenance of the proposed buildings. Proper storage and instruction in their use and storage is required. In addition, there are proposed fuel storage tanks along the east outside wall of the Maintenance building. Residential units are approximately 200 feet east of the proposed storage tanks. The applicant will be required to obtain underground/above ground tank permits from both the County Health and Fire Departments. If the facility requires Hazardous Materials Reporting (Material Safety Data Sheets) the Knox Haz Mat Data and Key Storage Cabinet, Model 1220 or 1300 with tamper switches shall be used. B. Would the proposal involve possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction and excavation activities will be confined to the proposed building sites, except for minimal off -site work as will be necessary for the project. These activities will not interfere with emergency evacuation of the area. Any work to be done in the road right -of ways will require an Encroachment Permit from the Public Works Department. This permit Page 34 i4�„ will require particular traffic safety measures to protect both the public and workers. C. Would the project involve the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? Less Than Significant Impact. The only identifiable health hazards associated with the proposed project consist of workers using chemicals during the course of maintenance of the various structures or functions within the resort, such as pool chemicals, pesticides, fuels, and other similar forms. OSHA and the EPA require instruction and certification for workers using particular chemicals to reduce the incidence of poisonings, etc. Mitigation shall require that all personnel using OSHA and EPA chemicals have the appropriate training and certifications. D. Would the project involve exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? Less Than Significant Impact. It is assumed that there are a variety of chemicals in use at the resort that may cause health hazards. The proper training and certifications should be obtained for the safety of both workers and resort guests and residents. E. Would the proposed project involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? No Impact. The proposed projects are located within a developed resort property where there is maintained and irrigated landscape and no natural vegetation that would be subject to brush fires. 3.10 NOISE Regional Environmental.Setting Noise levels in the Coachella Valley are mostly created by vehicular traffic on roadways. Some noise is made by aircraft. Local Environmental Setting Noise levels in the City are created by a variety of sources in and near the City. The major sources include vehicular noise on City streets and Highway 111, and temporary construction noises. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along the highway and major arterials. The City of La Quinta General Plan requires a commercial project to perform a noise study if the project is within a 1,000 feet of a residential use. Recommendations shall be made that help mitigate any noise form the project and ensure that outdoor noise is less than 75 dB CNEL in the maintenance yard and less than 60 dB CNEL at surrounding residential parcels. The City's Zoning Ordinance contains Sections 9.100.210 Noise Control for Nonresidential Land Page 35 il1r�'vU't Uses, and 9.60.230 Noise Control for Residential uses which both will apply to the Specific Plan. The project site is currently exposed to noise generated by traffic on Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive. A noise study was prepared for this project that states that it is estimated that the future community noise equivalent level (CNEL) at the maintenance building will be 65 dB due to traffic on Avenue 50, and 58 dB due to the traffic on Eisenhower Drive. These estimates are based on a level of service C average daily traffic volume (ADT) of 30,000 vehicles. Level of Service C traffic volumes are considered to provide the highest noise levels for a given roadway configuration. Measurements at the site indicate existing ambient hourly noise levels of 43 to 56 dB(a) due to traffic on the arterials during the late afternoon and early mourning hours. A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact. The noise study prepared for this project indicates that there are no significant impacts associated with the proposed project relative to the City's standards. However, the maximum noise levels that will be generated by vehicle movements and maintenance activities are considered excessive when experienced at the nearby existing homes. The report recommends the following mitigation measures: 1. Work bays facing the east should be kept closed prior to 7:00 a.m. each day. 2. Locate the noisiest equipment (e.g. tractors and backhoes) at the western side of the proposed maintenance building. 3. Employees utilizing equipment and the parking areas near the residential locations should be required to a) Minimize the application of power and equipment acceleration, and b) Avoid car door slamming and excessive vehicle acceleration. It should be noted that there are no proposed east -facing bays in the maintenance building. The existing 6 foot block wall along the eastern boundary of the maintenance parcel should be raised to 8 feet to provide additional noise buffering for the existing residences at Duna La Quinta. 1 ylo. Aic;Aj,% .,`._. :.w_ � <u,. s r`_, sue.. i w VVclz4' rt . �a The need for noise control at the future residential areas to the south should be considered at the time these areas are developed. Mitigation measures such as noise barriers and sound rated windows may be used to minimize annoyance to the future homeowners. B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact. The noise study for the project indicates that there will be three primary sources of noise associated with the operation of the proposed maintenance facility. These are: 1) Activities in the employee parking lot, primarily car door slamming (80 dB(A) @ 50'; 2) The maintenance equipment leaving or returning to the facility at the beginning and end of the day, as well as at lunch (73 dB(A) @ 50'); and 3) The tractors and backhoes (77 dB(A) @ 50'). Mitigation measures are recommended in the report to off -set some of this noise. Severe noises are only foreseen as short-term construction noises from heavy machinery capable of generating periodic peak noise Page 36 levels ranging from 70 to 95 dB(A) at a distance of 50 feet from the source. To mitigate the impacts of possible severe noises, the Applicant/developer must comply with Municipal Code construction hours regulations (Source: La Quinta General Plan; La Quinta Municipal Code). 3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES Regional Environmental Setting Law enforcement services are provided to the City of La Quinta through a contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. The Sheriffs Department extends service to the City from existing facilities located in the City of Indio. The Department utilizes a planning standard of 1.5 deputies per 1,000 population to forecast additional public safety personnel requirements in the City. Based on this standard, the City should have a police force of 25.5 officers, but is currently underserved. Currently, there are three officers per shift with three staggered shifts per day to serve the City. In addition to patrol, there is also a target team, Community Services Officer, and School Resources Officer assigned to the City (Source: 101-301 Police Services Supporting Information). Fire protection service is provided to the City by Riverside County Fire Department. The Fire Department administers two stations in the City; Station #32 on Old Avenue 52, at Ave. Bermudas, and Station #70, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. The Fire Department is also responsible for building and business inspections, plan review, and construction inspections. Based upon a planning standard of one paid firefighter per 1,000 population, the City is currently underserved. The Fire Department has indicated that a need exists for a third fire station in the northern part of the City between Washington Street and Jefferson Street. Currently, there are two paid firefighters per shift at each of the two fire stations in La Quinta. Volunteers supplement the paid staff (Source: La Quinta Building & Safety Department). Structural fires and fires from other man-made features are the most significant fire threats to the City. Hillside and brush fires are minimal as the hillside areas are virtually barren and the scattered brush on the valley floor is too sparse to pose a serious fire threat. Both the Desert Sands Unified School District and the Coachella Valley Unified School District serve the City. There are two elementary schools, one middle school and high school within the City. The City is within the College of the Desert Community College District. Library services are provided by the Riverside County Library System with a branch library located in the 'Village of La Quinta. The existing facility opened in 1988 and unadopted planning standards of 0.5 square feet per capita and 1.2 volumes per capita to forecast future facility requirements are used to serve the City. Utilizing this 1992 standard, the City was underserved in space but over served in terms of volumes (Source: La Quinta MEA). Health care services are provided in the City through JFK Memorial Hospital, located in Indio, and the Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility, located in the I I I La Quinta Center. The Eisenhower Page 37 Medical Center is located in Rancho Mirage. The Riverside County Health Department administers a variety of health programs for area residents and is located in Indio. Paramedic service is provided to the City by Springs Ambulance Service. Local Environmental Setting The nearest City fire station to the project is Station #32, located on Francis Hack Lane, approximately one mile southeast of the resort. Governmental services in La Quinta are provided by City staff at the Civic Center, and by other County, state, and federal agency offices located in the desert area or region. The project site will be served by the local schools in Desert Sands School District. A. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered governmental services in relation to fire protection? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed project will increase the need for fire protection due to the construction of resort residential units, a spa and fitness center, and a maintenance facility. Development of the these new structures will require plan review, construction inspection, and fire protection services in a cumulative manner. To help mitigate possible fire hazards, the new structures shall comply with the fire flow and fire safety building standards of the Riverside County Fire Code to prevent fire hazard on -site and to minimize the need for fire protection services. Unobstructed fire access will be required through the design of the project streets and setbacks between structures. Other code requirements (such as sprinkler systems, construction materials, etc) shall be complied with by the Applicant (Source: Fire Department). B. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in, the need for new or altered government services in relation to police protection? Less Than Significant Impact. A comment letter from the Sheriffs Department was received for this project. No significant comments were offered in this letter. Thus, no significant impacts are anticipated in relation to police protection (Source: Riverside Sheriffs Department). C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to school services? Less Than Significant Impact. No response has been received from the Desert Sands Unified School District. The proposed residential units are the only component of the project that may generate students. The proposed use for the units is individual ownership with the option available to the owner to place one or more bedrooms into the hotel room pool to accommodate overflow guests to the resort. The maximum number of students that might be generated by the units, if all were owner -occupied would be 59.5 students District -wide average, using the factor of 1/2 student Page 38 per unit. If the majority of the bedrooms were placed into the hotel room rental pool, then student generation would be minimal. It is anticipated that there will be few owner -occupied units as the units are not designed for full-time permanent residents. The school mitigation fee that is currently collected on all new development at the time building permits are issued will be required of this project for the residential units. D. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to the maintenance of public facilities, including roads? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed maintenance facility will be located across a public street from the main resort campus. Equipment such as golf carts, tractors, backhoes, etc. will be transported on flat-bed trucks from the maintenance facility across Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50 to the main resort campus for gardening of hotel grounds. E. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in, a need for new or altered governmental services in relation to other governmental services? Less Than Significant Impact. Building, engineering, inspection, and planning review needed for the proposed project will be partially offset by application, permit, and inspection fees charged to the Applicant and contractors. 3.12 UTILITIES Regional Environmental Services The City of La Quinta is served by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) for electrical power supply and The Gas Company for natural gas service. Existing power and gas lines and substations are found throughout the City. III) has four substations in La Quinta with electricity generated by a steam plant in El Centro and hydroelectric power generated by the All American Canal. General Telephone Exchange (GTE) provides telephone service for the City. Cablevision serves the are for cable television service. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides water and sewer service to the City. CVWD obtains its water from underground aquifers and from the Colorado River. CVWD operates a water system with potable water pumped from domestic water wells in the City. The wells range in depth from 500 to 900 feet. Potable water is stored in five reservoirs located in La Quinta. The City's stormwater drainage system is administered by the CVWD, which maintains and operates a comprehensive system to collect and transport flows through the City. The City is served by Waste Management of the Desert for solid waste disposal. Nonhazardous, mixed municipal solid waste is taken to three landfills within the Coachella Valley. Page 39 Local ,Environmental Setting There is an existing City storm drainage system that is located in the southern portion of the resort property that protects no only the resort, but properties in the general area. Runoff is also directed to the golf course lakes for retention and absorption. All utilities (natural gas, electricity, water, cable television, sewer) exist at the resort. A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to power and gas service? Less Than Significant Impact. Power, sewer, and natural gas lines were brought in to the resort many years ago. The proposed new buildings and residential units will need extensions of all utilities from main lines and valves that are located on the resort. All overhead electricity lines are routed around the perimeter of the resort site. Internal distribution lines will be placed underground. No significant impact are anticipated regarding utilities. No mitigation is required beyond utility plan checking and permit issuances. B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to communication systems? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed structures and units will require service from GTE or other purveyors for telephone communication wiring and systems. It is anticipated that the telephone serve will be an extension of the existing service at the resort. All overhead public utility transmission lines for telephone are routed around the perimeter of the La Quinta resort. All internal lines will be placed underground. C. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will require water service. It is not anticipated that the development will result in an significant adverse impact on local water resources or water infrastructure. A comment letter from CVWD states that they will provide the new structures with water and sewer services. D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to sewer services or septic tanks? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed structures will generate sewage which will have to be transported and treated by CVWD. The developer will be responsible for the cost of connection to the sewer system. In 1992, the existing demand for sanitary sewage was 252 gallons per dwelling unit per day, with a total existing demand of 1.49 million gallons per day. This standard is based on the sanitary sewer standard divided by 80 percent (Source: La Quinta MEA). The current capacity of the Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant is 4.35 million gallons per day (MGD). This facility serves Page 40 many communities in the Coachella Valley, including La Quinta. CVWD indicates that this facility can be expanded in the future to accommodate growth, including the La Quinta Resort (Source: Draft The La. Quinta Resort Specific Plan). E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to storm water drainage? Less Than Significant Impact. Storm water drainage policy requires that storm water flows generated on -site shall not leave the site. On -site retention and percolation applies to all but the most intense storm generated water. The La Quinta Resort may receive substantial runoff flows from the Santa Rosa Mountains that are transmitted to the Oleander Basin located to the south, and channel located to the east. Stormwater has been discussed in the section on water resources in this document. Drainage plans are required for this project and will be reviewed by the CVWD and the City's Public Works Department prior to issuance of project permits. No other mitigation will be required other than that required by CVWD and the Public Works Department. F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to solid waste disposal? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed resort residential area will be served by extension of the contract refuse collection services currently in place at the resort. Prior to regularly scheduled pick-up and removal, refuse will be contained in a maintained trash bin area. The Applicant is responsible to coordinate the extension of trash pick-up with the current waste hauler. The additional trash generated by the proposed project will cumulatively impact the local and regional landfill. Only one landfill is currently open in the Coachella Valley. On -site recycling programs will be required and are to be coordinated with Waste Management of the Desert or other recycling hauler. 3.13 AESTHETICS Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is located mostly within a desert valley cove. There are steep mountains to the west and south of the City. Views of the desert and surrounding mountains are visible on most days throughout from many vantage points in the City. The La Quinta MEA discusses the visual assessment of major and minor ridgelines within the City. This assessment is based on the topographical features of elevation and steep slopes. Major ridgelines have been identified a three locations in the City and are classified as highly sensitive due to their elevation, which ranges from 300 to more than 1,600 feet above sea level. The high sensitivity of these area is also based on the existing moderate to steep slopes of the ridges, which range between 10 and 30 percent. The existing topographical character of the City which was created by ancient Lake Cahuilla, now exhibits low sloped sedimentary deposits throughout the majority of the City, which abruptly transitions to steep sloped terrain along the western and southern regions of the City. The close Page 41 proximity of the steep mountains with the flat plains increases the sensitivity of the existing visual features of La Quinta. Minor ridgelines include the ridgelines which link the major ridgelines to the toe of the slope, which protrudes away from the mountain range, thereby increasing their visibility. There are 18 minor ridgelines that are classified as moderately sensitive based upon their low to high elevation, ranging from approximately 200 to 1,400 feet above sea level. The existence of steep slopes which range from 10 to 30 percent is also characteristic of minor ridgelines. The assessments of viewsheds within the City is based on the existence of focal points located within La Quinta or immediately outside its jurisdictional boundaries. Viewsheds are categorized as distinctive, attractive or common and are assessed based upon the provision of major focal points and the proximity of the vantage point. Distinctive viewsheds are identified through their close proximity (within two miles) to elevational high points and exhibit a high visual sensitivity. Attractive viewsheds are determined through their mid -distant proximity (between two and five miles) to elevational high points or close proximity to minor ridgeline formations and exhibit a moderate visual sensitivity. Common viewsheds are identified through their long distance views (over five miles) to primary focal points, major ridgelines and minor ridgelines and produce a low visual sensitivity. A series of five vantage points based on two mile radii were established within La Quinta to classify the viewsheds by type. Details on this methods are contained in the La Quinta MEA. Local .Environmental Setting The project site is located in a largely developed resort complex in the west -central portion of the City. The resort was initiated in 1926 and has a history of continued development since that date. The resort is tucked into an alluvial cove with an east -facing view. The EIR prepared for the resort in 1974 states that "Development will change the present open desert and agricultural image which presently exists in much of the community. While this change certainly does not blight the environment, whether or not it is a positive or a negative impact is a personal and aesthetic judgment, not a technical assessment. Also construction and landscaping may impede views of the mountains. These views, west of the project area, are one of the more important assets of the community. The design and low density profile of the development tend to reduce the severity of this impact". A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. The existing structures at the resort include one, two, and three story buildings. The architectural style of the buildings is mostly Spanish Colonial or similar styles. The existing landscaping includes tall trees of many species including date palms. Thus, the existing viewshed disturbance of the resort includes mostly low profile buildings with dense landscaping. Certain views of the minor ridgelines and toe of slope located to the west and north are blocked by the existing development within the resort campus. The La Quinta MEA designated a Primary and Secondary Viewshed Focal Point near the northeast corner of the intersection of Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive which spans in an eastward direction. The resort is located to the west of this Focal Point. Thus, it is concluded that there is no significant impact to the scenic vista in the City from the proposed project. Page 42 The proposed structures and landscaping will follow similar architectural styles, including height and siting considerations. Architectural guidelines are proposed in the Draft Specific Plan for this project. B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed structures will be required to comply City with architectural and landscaping policies and ordinances under the Site Development Permit. In addition, because of the historic structures within the resort, the Historic Preservation Commission must review the architectural styles of the proposed structures for compatibility with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Structures. The proposed design of the new structures can not be radically different than the historic structures nor can it be identical. The new structures incorporate many design elements of the historic buildings, but not identical, to them. The historic structures are known as aesthetically pleasing in design, therefore the proposed new buildings, being similar in design, can also be termed as aesthetically pleasing. The relationships of massing and scale between the historic buildings and between the proposed new buildings was determined to be similar by the Historic Preservation Commission. The proposed new maintenance building will be a metal structure with stucco coating with full roof with "S" tile. Elevations have been submitted by the Applicant, and aesthetic compatibility with the surrounding structures can be made. There would not be a potentially significant impact on this issue. C. Would the project create light or glare? Potentially Significant Impact. The anticipated development of the new resort residential units, spa and fitness buildings, and maintenance facility will include exterior security lighting which will cumulatively contribute to the existing light and glare emanating from the resort complex. The Draft Specific Plan for this project does not address lighting fixture types for the proposed new buildings, therefore, no assessment of the environmental impacts can be made. However, all exterior lighting will be required to comply with the requirements of the City's Dark Sky Ordinance, as well as the Uniform Building Code requirements. Parking lot safety lighting for maintenance facility will be required to have low, shielded fixtures that will comply with the Dark Sky Ordinance. 3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Assessment Much of the history of the Coachella Valley is known and recorded in various publications and exhibited in local museums, etc. La Quinta fits prominently into the history of the Coachella Valley. A portion of the prehistory of the La Quinta area is known through the archaeological record gained Page 43 from various investigations over the past twenty years and from extensive ethnographic information. A discussion of the prehistory and history of La Quinta is found in the Draft Historic Context Statement for the City of La Quinta. Other discussions are found in the La Quinta General Plan and the MF?A. Local ,Environmental ,Setting The history of La Quinta area extends back to an era when much of the lower Coachella Valley was inundated by ancient Lake Cahuilla. The La Quinta Resort would have been near the lake shore and have been utilized for a habitation and resource procurement area as was much of the La Quinta area. The project site is located within the historic La Quinta Hotel complex. The history of the hotel has been documented in a Historic Resources Report prepared by Mellon & Associates. This report concludes that there may be enough historic integrity remaining in the structures and landscaping to justify the designation of a historic district. For a detailed discussion of the historic buildings at the resort please see the Mellon & Associates Report. A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Paleontological deposits are normally found in association with the ancient lake bed which is below 42 feet above msl. A portion of the proposed maintenance facility site is within the ancient lake bed area. There have been no paleontological surveys or investigations conducted within the immediate vicinity of the resort, however, paleontological finds have been made in other areas of the City where there are ancient lake bed deposits. The maintenance facility site has been disturbed somewhat by stockpiling of spoil dirt from the excavation of nearby golf lakes in past years. It is also assumed that during the construction of the golf course, equipment staging may have taken place on the project site area. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the top five feet of the maintenance facility site may have been disturbed. To mitigate the potential for paleontological resources on the eastern half of the maintenance site all excavation and trenching below five feet in depth shall have paleontological monitoring by a qualified professional paleontologist. A report of the monitoring activities shall be submitted to the Historic Preservation Commission for review and acceptance. B. Would the project disturb archaeological resources? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The resort campus has never had a complete archaeological survey conducted. The only archaeological survey conducted was in 1975, by S. McWilliams, for a specific expansion project at the resort. No archaeological resources were observed during that survey. However, it is known, from various publications, that the area including the resort property was actively used during the prehistoric period for habitation and resource procurement. Numerous recorded archaeological sites have been found within a one mile radius of the resort property, and even more within a two mile radius (Source: City of La Quinta Confidential Archaeological Site Map). Thus, the archaeological sensitivity of the project area is high. For the Page 44 V J U �M 4! proposed spa and fitness center buildings and the resort residential units, archaeological monitoring shall be required by a qualified archaeologist for all grading and trenching below ten feet in depth. A report of the monitoring activites shall be submitted to the Historic Preservation Commission for review and acceptance. C. Would the project affect historical resources? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The Mellon & Associates Historic Resources Report for the La Quinta Hotel concludes that there are locally significant historic structures and features on the resort campus. Some of these structures may also be eligible for inclusion to the National Register of Historic Places. Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 is included in the Specific Plan Amendment 94 for this project, which required the review of the historically -related architecture proposed for the new structures. On June 19, 1997, the City's Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the Mellon & Associates report and issues involved for the Certificate of Appropriateness. The Commission forwarded two recommendations to the Planning Commission and the City Council: 1) Acceptance of the Historic Resources Report for the La Quinta Hotel with the condition that the comments listed in the HPC Staff Report be addressed and the report resubmitted to the Historic Preservation Commission for review; and 2) That the approval of Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 be subject to the condition that only one story structures be constructed next to historic structures, and that a qualified archaeological monitor observe the grading and trenching for the project for those area below ten feet in depth. D. Would the project have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique cultural values? No Impact. The proposed project will not affect any known ethnic cultural values. E. Would the project restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? No Impact. There are no known religious functions or uses on the proposed project site that would be impacted by the new structures. 3.15 RECREATION Regional Rnvironmental Setting The City of La Quinta has a adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan that assesses the exiting resources and facilities and the future needs of the City. The City contains approximately 28.7 acres of developed parkland for Quimby Act purposes. The 845.0 acre regional Lake Cahuilla park is not included in this count. There are also bike, hiking, and equestrian pathways and trails within the City. Page 45 Local .Environmental Setting The project site is within an existing resort campus that contains golf courses, tennis courts, swimming pools, bicycle rentals, and other recreational amenities. A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will include the demolition of an existing tennis stadium and several tennis courts. Several tennis courts will remain, however. The Spa and Fitness Buildings will be added to the existing recreational amenities for the resort. No new public recreational amenities are being proposed. The project is within a private, gated resort with many recreational amenities. The proposed resort residential will be required to pay the parks fee in lieu of dedication of parkland. B. Would the proposal affect existing recreational opportunities? Less Than Significant Impact. Existing public recreational facilities will not be affected by the proposed project. The project site is within a private, gated resort property. SECTION 4: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The proposed project will not have unmitigable significant adverse impacts on the environmental issues addressed in this checklist. Some of the issue areas could have a potential significant impact if appropriate mitigation measures are not implemented. The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings of significance set forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines and based on the results of this environmental assessment: • The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed project will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation of mitigation measures. • The proposed project will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned development in the immediate vicinity. • The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation measures. Page 46 SECT [ON 5: EARLIER ANALYSES A. Earlier Analyses Used. Other analyses and special studies used for the preparation of this document were: La Quinta Cove Golf & Tennis Club Environmental Impact Report, July 1974, Harry H. Schmitz & Associates. 2. The La Quinta Resort Draft Specific Plan - amendment #4 3. La Quinta General Plan 1992 - Master Environmental Assessment. 4. La Quinta General Plan 1992. 5. SCREENXLS 6. Specific Plan 121-E. 7. Specific Plan 121-E Revised. 8. South Coast Air Quality Management District Draft CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 9. Application materials for General Plan Amendment 97-054, Zone Change 97-083, Tentative Tract 28545, Site Development Permit 97-607, Site Development 97-608, and Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003. 10. La Quinta Hotel Historic Resources Report. May 1997. Mellon & Associates. 11. Resort Hotel SP Amendment - Traffic Analysis Data. June 1997, Endo Engineering. 12. Noise Assessment for the La Quinta Resort Maintenance Facility. May 1997. J. J. Van Houten & Associates, Inc. 13. Environmental Assessment 95-304 prepared for Specific Plan 121-E, Revised - Amendment #3. B. Impacts Adequately Addressed. All potential environmental impacts/issue areas are considered to be adequately addressed with this environmental assessment. Certification of this EA by the La Quinta City Council will confirm the adequacy of the environmental assessment. Page 47 C. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures are discussed in this addendum as they relate to the proposed project. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan containing these measures will be included as part of the Environmental Assessment and project conditions of approval. Page 48 �O � � W F- Q C7 W Z 0 W F- Q Ll! F- z O W H U v z W z Q a z O a � Z O a a -� U O o cc = a z a Q O W Z OC :3 H O p Q W 0 (L oc: co o z 0 Ua p• O cn I-.N U y Q 9 z z in W Lu w Co 0 O cc O a c N O cn M a cn a aao mP F" cn z Q �c O C 60 -° e 00 Ld I U O rn N c L a) `- a. O U H i e U�tA"o c O EN-C Z L a) LO uaca0Q U 00 04 a� � Ir L 1 > �> CL Q 'j ch j F - n a) U) OI ® Z J I O z Z Q U Lu ~' Q Q a A L) Lu Q W - Q 0 uj Z m Q t� J w a Y �U O w v= v cu a) +1 U c_ N Q � c uj F- co O V o rn c •c - o U N o a c cu o � Z O U "a a3 F- N > o .p Lc) ca �t o a LO • , a) 00 a. F- N c It a) O o Z mg cn F— Z a0 cn CD _ E w E ` E a o m U m (n rn E caca c a) c v� o Q E a) a) co O CD T a) U c c cn a) m = F= Z -p c cu N O' c a) rn t N z 41 N C — CoO 0 O �o a c,u� 0, a a) c cu c) o > o C N c r co � a) CN L w 06 U cc 7 Q W ++ U U o s- co N +a) U U OCL O .— O c Q p Co, Co Z RS F- a) co ' C c41 o U Z I?. a _ - R) Q c a vi J J a) i LU C.).c = fO+ .0 p y Q Q E� co a c d a - U �N UU Er N O i M O cC �- N W f-' Q W } Um Z Qiu n �e a. v �-. w 0 = U U Q w H m U 0 Z H m 00 u. LU Z J ac m 0 Z Z 00 a� w m tu Z CD Q d O c co �- N CL w �W = E T o2i co U w O U_ Q p C L U a Q 1 W IL co cc H ai c n a. L C- Ev W "7 N Q r, t� N cn NLU o 00 C ri °; z 0 Z V V 1 LLJ / < c bm 22 �u a� �w O� Q� Q cc LU � Q U m � 2 � �cc k \ § @ 2 E .� o CL o C 0 t E /� mO CLa �(D m 0 C >® 0 E 2 § E LU t Q Ecc CL �k3 2 « k m E E O \ ) 0 .(D Q CL \ - / w E \ ° u % § o k O � o \ § « w g L m Z ' ) 'a w o ¥ n CD 5 m W LLI k E \ > @ + 3 U Cl) Q - cc ' a U 2 D Cl) � E < w E E c m% 5 � / L / 0 / w Q \ [I2 w f-' Q w >- Uw 20 ,J Y (L v w O r U U m co C Q co � w 0 f U N > O Q C Q Co Q a. O U O N 4, 2 U co) a Z va c n. COc U O a) F- a) CD cn�, O L C_ ++ C cm C.)O U O m m O Co n.oa UE co c r O U d Z w .--1 c co J (� F- O p C :t C� U � U_ Q U Q m a) C c c° c Z cn 4i m —_ O U N cry 'c E F- U m O -a a C N a)N E Q a c a) c E C C7 w E o 1 m `- m— c L °J H OC +, O c m tm E _o m O +� � cn m a) a) N o jr U w C m a aV x L ic o w a) cn > d em Q s n U o.� � �-�"' aU +� E w m Q `' N a o E +_� m d Ncn m Q LU O O ��' crD -1 U Z 0 F- cn 2 U U U = a W W H Q 0 W } U OD Z Q w J �C a U �w O= U U N C O w H v� CD °C U m Q 0 W N a) ca O � a. Z � O U N C O U a 0LL w Z O maC O Z Z 00 cn a aci E r ca d CL Q� O UCD o Z 0 O +� cn w F- (n co w n. a) +, E a� c c_ aci °'a E C9w a o cCo C in fA c N U ? U , to F_ lC O �►_ `+ (n +' �1 Q O Lr W ►_ m C � V C cm O N +O+ U E d Cc: > c° C (0 U Rf O L H 0 coQ O C a Q c cm N . N W a) m 0)>� 1 V U) crl +O, o (L a)O m +O, � CL Q .0 W Q f n k1Uti w F-• Q 0 w>- U m Z Q w J Y a U w O= U U co -0 Q c Coc a) CU W � N a�YCco C F- co a o O Uo c`4-cd O >. c CL CD � G (D vi O v c co Z s _ C a 0—co F- V C O C O O a U o C: c o (1) E E C7 +' w Z (ao -j x °o O C FD N ~ a>i 0 Z Z a O cn o ? c uj E U E m CL ao U 0 m cn U O N _N Z Q o 41 > CD O cn +� c O U O CD fn Z � E co w,, > N N F- Ir O { + C + , c N ,� .n E o a �m QZ U co c 0- _ m.� fl - pU o}C w e~C _U c c O U •° +, cr c�a Z O > c > c OWC a> o o < CCco s c o 0 aoci n N H U c �N f- W +1 U N O n.0 m LU M O a a)O _J U Z 0 c`a ++ Q 0 CL Q m U,. , n l �U 6 4J %-W' uj / < O qm 20 ab �w om U� , 2 @ q @q 7 « \— w c � C 06 SCo DCD 3 £ 0 � f 2ƒ a) > r- § ƒ CD / uoWwf uDw \ o c \ � z 2 .E CD c c� 2 5 2 § 2 c c CL a_ i7L a_ @ § c > Lc o @ w z \ (D °- /_ o > — Q O R � § w § E O cn cr- E \ k § Cl. �Uj U 0 3 D CD U m § ■ 2 m kc 0 .(D�� o LU m o= �a �2=k £ .gym cc � / 0 72 _ 0� r CLCca (DLL > E 2 - \/ E p m UJ y t t ® q§ k(n @ # ° E & g g D m ».§ £ C% 2' 2 ® UJ k Q w ° 2 ) � — • CD § o U) c 2 CD Q K D 2 c E r° o \° 0.- ° c% o� E / o@« 0 @ .. LU c@ o o@ o R c k§/ o Q & @ § 0 k o m ■ t .c § E m a� ■ a 2 Co : @ £ \ � w Q > c @ @ @ 2 E o f@§ 0� a — Q. m m§ 2 m o a « o @ a a m" a £ E 2 \\ b a m o k m a y / 2 O CL§ 2 o 0 0 3 3 q 2 "Cl 2 /� 3% W H Q W >- Um Z QLw J Y a U � w O= v0 W a co J U 0 >. U t m U :3 a� C7 � Z_ c cc vi (1).0 L +' U CJ C n. m to a..5 4. C c N O O w Z O — J C) OCD > +T CD Z > C U)C O M E C ON co N E a) E W cc E " C • c0 c0 E a— a O O O U o m 0 CD CL m m Z O_ U C6 > a c cc � C td C Cl)Q E c N ice' Cal Ir cc LU Z U C N a� U O m W W C CL +�. > F- i O = Q N W C O CD N OC O +' C m co > co �- § O m Z LLI CL E ~ w > — a� N U a� co CO a) Q E +-' E O co O U) Z 4i m O .0 a E LU O O U U rl �1 uj F- LU >- � z QLU ab �w om UU � \ � / ca � 2 U- 0 = co 2 \ \ o 4- G > $ u § 3 \ \ § a. 3 0 k cCD ccE " CU /k 0k /E �� @R a)� EC) +y � § E fr E co § / UO 2 m CD -0 z ., c -0 g \ QC- c 0)\ c -0 E k 0- E �2 C� cu f t 0 2 CU cn 2 w @ { co 77 @20 � o c a)N § L I / / 4 w� cu f / R 2 0� E 0 2�-6 > CL a) U 2 U \ : 2 aka , cn U w 2 +1 )D 2 2 o E 7\ U23 W F Q W } U o0 Z Q 0 J ]G a U W O= U U > ca +' O —j C W C -o U) U a) = U r O C U) M > O ca cn M :t'' Z>Qr- U c O U O co 0) (� C U O _Z 13) E U O N C O O U M C W N co L a d a O ac cr O� CD o o E Z ° W +T' a� a, mo ;� Fn�- Uo ZZ Oo G? cn Co 'C uj G E E a :3 O N OO U 0 > +� CD p O -Op N N O to O -�G C O C E O C w- + a CD O Q ` , -Z O-0 O E O E cc a > O ca °U CoaoO o o s a a, o F' n �� CD EE �� CD �� (� W CD O CL 40 m O O +, "" C rn O Cl O U c`n oo .Q 4- �, C to O M U -p a O cn O C cn + 0 U C O ` O N fa O X O O O U ca C U C^ •O C 4' cn -0 Q_ a) C ca O 2 L (O U ca W v= C 4= N C C C M O N O 0 o C L C C� N O 0 0 4- `- C` U a +� C ca C +_' O, a U � N U r cn O N C cn C ca O O +, O +- C co W W C N ca a a' cn C O '� Q .� (� i i X m a) O cn C > to c Co co��°;�+3oco a) ana)CM a c a' cn O Z H U M CD N E N ca a E aD E := 0 0 0 O= 'co E L v ca 0 0 'm o ca O v1 W C Q m C U J ++ E W ea ++ ea to as U m E L _e V e- M co J m Q m a W e- N M 4 lf) CO W f—' a 0 Wy U m Z aui a U W Om U U cv c6 +' C W C :3 U O — L O U N LL 0 U w0.• N d f7 Z C m O L cm C co F- V 0 m V cd " cn a O c0 a U o a N m ._ � a Q Lj-O� Z m Jcn N Z Z N N E a C c`a cu cm L ii m U ITl L v0 a) Z O 4� f2 O C-) co U co co C p �N E ¢ a CD CL E co W ° a F- CC _ V O +• L O w (/} } > U V N W a W y C cC CL a) U w O + C C O_ U � in W E C N +, ca C +1 C m +- E V m c cd > Iv U W Q ° a> E >. a� O Q UJ e— cn W a)W m N a U n 'J I t lJ C °ZS "C i-- M N 23 d o IL O O F- a) V) W cr a U co W f-' Q W U o0 Z nw Q J Y aU 5;w O = U U ca J Q O w T t F- U v o Ud .D cA C N co O O C7 rn C Z C CL 18 N O ~ t U O O 4 N O C 'C O d U CO C_ O OLU C7 d Z cu .J cc —� m O FAF_ o Z Z _ NE U w m � U m co o U Z Q C ca U C` 'a N O +, (1) N ai a)U O N o U ~ Q a a) E > o O vi C7 O a)0 U 'U c U ~ac C � C O 4-1 L U L E 4= U U O O C O C�O U Cr U N O CL 0 O O _J C Ll_ O a)uj U a)D U a)W M— CL L Q cn LU ci N co v >C N O '}O- L O V nl cn W N p Q� - Q ~ �' U �- M � U m O O cn O O O 00 F- W Q W W Q W } U m Z Q w J Y IL V Ew O= U U O �Q N (1) m Q 0W � co c -a +-j C: 4r- Co c °U).`.— H_ m2 a CD 41 m C CU 'T• = 0 .> m O O. m _ C=c) m a)ZOa) d.. J a. to W Q (A ° a C O U Z C 0 U F- co m c a) m m C7 a m a) E a) O c E a> OO E Z_ OCL O U _ mO m CD > CD � CO > a. �~ 0 Oc"0 ZO ZO 13- m� +1 �E �E("D E a E n'CM U 0 U 0 w +� CL to cn cn c c Q a) L O Q N E ai O U O m +_� ++ ZO c n O (n m P 0 C m m m m m m °� a E — �a c Q CD 0 Q cn E m a) O O cn N E a '-' O E Q. Q F GC C cp'�- N> O fn O W H C cn C m v- OL + m a-' m Q2 W = cn m E,a) co c U > ) oX Cc) CD O C CDFu OLU ) ' — cL Q Q U orn M e- cn cn aci +' aci +' pp m N +� E W M .++ W Q W } U m Z �w Q a U 5; w O= UU y C X co C Q O 1 a) Rf U CO cr w C C o o D c a U U a= rn Otm c a) O m o— C a) U C O> > co: E (n E o d U aL c U O a)OU w cm` O a U = a`. U U �' co a E vi vi r a) -� a) -a :t '> , a) '> a) a) -Q a) z C U C U N ns C O +O+ C � �C O O (n U cm 'r� a7 ( 41 > O L co > a) ^ O X O X O d7 C O 0 a) 0 a) 0 c- a. c c c c m E E E E 0 O a a a a w z O O o O m p > > > > m~ Z Z 0 O O 0 a 0 c c � c ? c w� SE 1 �E �E �E E E E E a m coE E a. E a E co a O a) O a) O a) o a) U 0 U 0 U 0 U 0 is U O a)O O L Q -0O cm O O cm C C a) O U ZO w c LM +° 1 c 4- 'n C o c ° o (n o Hcm V Co +, Q cn O a) O a3 C�'O' O O U O �}U = E a c OaOU �_ maUO C L+O _ a m 0) _0 , O cD E � W ai o +1 o 4- O a) +Lo E ;- a) Oto a" '- L�=a +to , cn X + mma)a)�) -0 W Q U c a a a a — caQ >° i—-O m o c a E +C +; cnaw E E E O n- `A OE U a) aa cn W tm C Ta) . OU NU O +1 ,> +:._O U a U U U UU U 41 o° o a> vcn aL� fn Co LO O Q ri U) °; a ¢ Z O i ° t— (D Cl) F— 10 w H Q 0 w � U m Z uw Q Nd a U � w O= U U Q tw- Q E d 4-- O C7 U +to Z co 'E a _n O m O (L m C � a) C J cr m 0 O cn a� O Z C O C � C a) OC a) w �EE Ir E i O E Q Q O 0 cp a) U 0 a. 0 m Q a +.' T C Z aD O _� o a a — O O ca N F- � C O •+O—,, N +L+ N Z ca u O cca a`) +� 'c Q O ;p cc n. w Q U Q ca O �;; m '° co U c > E cO W a) C �v� cu fn cc E_- C. 0 m cC0 Ln CA "1 m � O O Q W 06 Y CO O C� ) 0 C o� co Q a ti PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT #4 TO SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT #4) KSL RECREATION CORP. AND ITS ASSIGNS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 8th day of July, 1997, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of KSL Recreation Corporation and its Assigns to amend the aforementioned Specific Plan to allow new residential uses, ancillary hotel uses, and a new maintenance facility, whose location is more particularly described as follows: Portions of Sections 1 and 36, T6S, R6E, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, the County of Riverside approved Specific Plan 121-E/EIR 41 (La Quinta Cove Golf Club) in 1975, that allowed the expansion of the Hotel to include construction of 637 condominium units, 420 hotel rooms, 27-hole golf course with clubhouse, and related service facilities on +619 acres; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did adopt Specific Plan 121-E:, Revised, as set forth in City Council Resolution 85-24 on October 5, 1982, allowing the Master Plan to be amended to permit an additional 279 condominium units and 146 hotel rooms; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did amend the adopted Specific Plan in 1988 (Amendment 1) , in 1989 (Amendment 2), and in 1995 (Amendment 4), permitting additional enlargement and modification to the Plan; and, WHEREAS, said Specific Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Director conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 97-340) and has determined that the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and a Mitigated Negative Declaration should be recommended for certification; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing 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 and reasons to justify the recommendation of the specific plan amendment: Peressp 121 e#4 ; t r r 't � V U U J �! Planning Commission Resolution 97- The proposed Specific Plan amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the applicant has applied for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to Tourist Commercial which permits the uses proposed to be developed, provided conditions are met. 2. The Specific Plan Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare in that development proposed under the Specific Plan has been designed to be compatible with the surrounding properties and provide for necessary public improvements and infrastructure. 3. The Specific Plan Amendment is compatible with zoning on adjacent properties in that the changes proposed are primarily adjacent to existing resort type uses (e.g. hotel facilities and tennis club) or will result in development similar to other country clubs (e.g. country club maintenance facilities located next to residential uses). 4. The Specific Plan is suitable and appropriate for the property in that the proposed development is an extension of the existing resort or a use commonly associated with the existing use. The proposed development will be reviewed under a Site Development Permit review process at which time project related conditions will be required to mitigate impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment 97-340, indicating that the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not result in any significant environmental impacts, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration should be certified. 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above -described 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 8th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, tc wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Peressp 121 et14 Planning Commission Resolution 97- JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California t r Pump 121 a#4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.97- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED SP 121 E, AMENDMENT #4 KSL RECREATION CORPORATION AND ITS ASSIGNS JULY 8, 1997 GENERAL 1. Specific Plan 121 E, Amendment #4, shall comply with the requirements and standards of the La Quinta Municipal Code and all other applicable laws, unless modified by the following conditions. 2. The Specific Plan text shall be revised to all required revisions, with a minimum of five final texts submitted to the Community Development Department. 3. The total number of single family residential units shall be revised to 1436 (1558-143+21). 4. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. 5. The applicant/developer shall comply with the mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan attached to Environmental Assessment 97-340. 6. Check made out to County of Riverside in the amount of $1328. For the project Environmental assessment shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within 24 hours after approval by the City Council. 7. Clubhouses and tennis courts or complexes shall be deleted from the permitted uses in Planning Area V in the Specific Plan text. 8. The applicant shall provide an easement for all hillside areas to remain undeveloped open space, except for the areas presently developed. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 9. Submit to Public Works Department a revised hydrology study to account for the proposed increase in impermeable surfaces within the specific plan area prior to issuance of a building permit for any construction authorized by this Specific Plan for The Applicant. Conapppcsp121e,a4 PLAINNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.97- SP 121 E, AMENDMENT #4 July 8, 1997 10. Make changes to specific items in the draft specific plan as follows. Page Item Comment 3.5 Garage/Carport Setback 20-foot minimum from street curb or p e d e s t r i a n path/walk. 3.6 Garage/Carport Setback 20-foot minimum from street curb or p e d e s t r i a n path/walk. 3.11 Garage/Carport Setback 20-foot minimum from street curb or pedestrian path/walk 3.13 Ancillary Building Setback 2 0- f o o t minimum from street curb or pedestrian path/walk if a driveway or if perimeter street is public. 3.20 Paragraph 3.3.16 Add "roads" to items for which plans are required. Add the requirement that plans be approved by the City Engineer. 3 Conapppcsp 121 e,a4 PLANNING COMNIISSION RESOLUTION NO. 97- SP 121E, AMENDMENT #4 July 8, 1997 3.21 Paragraphs C-2 and C-3 Plans for and revisions to on -site parking and circulation facilities shall be approved by the City Engineer. Conapppcsp 121 e,a4 H '.Lyles ►T WAM O !TM! rA= 0 UM, 14 CASE MAP CASE No. GPA 97-054 sheet 2 of 2 Specific Ilan "1i.. La Quinta Resort IM... 1• ll...n,.. VA I.r 13. IW1 ORTH SCALE: NTSU PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONE CHANGE 97-083 (RL to RM) TO THE CITY COUNCIL CASE NO.: CZ 97-083 KSL RECREATION CORP. AND ITS ASSIGNS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of July 8,1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL Recreation Corp. and its Assigns for a Zone Change from RL (Low Density Residential 2-4 Dwellings per acre) to ML (Medium Density Residential), for approximately 18.2 acres, at the vacant northeast corner of Calle Mazatlan and Camino Quintana and at the southeast corner of 50th Avenue and Eisenhower Drive, more particularly described as: APN: 631-700-076 through 81, 773-020-021, 026, 029, and 031 WHEREAS, said Change of Zone request has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended), pursuant to the adoption of Resolution 83-68 by the City Council, in that the Community Development Director has determined that the Zone Change will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (EA 97-340) is recommended; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, 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 and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Zone Change. This Amendment and Zone Change is internally consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan not being amended in that the Amendment and Zone Change only affects land uses which already exist as a part of the Plan. 3. This Amendment and Zone Change will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses will require Planning Commission review and approval of future development plans, which will ensure that adequate conditions of approval. 4. The new land use and zone designation is compatible with the designations on adjacent properties because the Planning Commission review and approval will ensure compatibility and in some areas, the adjacent use is similar due to its resort nature. p:pereszc97083 5. The new land use and zone designation is suitable and appropriate for the properties involved because it is an extension of the existing resort or a use commonly associated with the existing uses. 6. The situation and general conditions have substantially changed since the existing land use and zone designations were imposed in that the resort market has created a market for additional rental units and rooms. 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; 2. That it does hereby recommend adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Change of Zone 95- 083 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as illustrated in the map labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of July, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California resopc. 131 • 0: CASE No. CASE MAP T c, is Plan . 1i.. to Resort u.:... 1. �a...a.. t•,t NORTH ZC 97-083 I SCALE: sheet 2 of 2 11 NTS PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28545 TO ALLOW A 134-LOT SUBDIVISION ON APPROXIMATELY 62.2 ACRES CASE NO.: TTM 28545 APPLICANT: KSL DESERT RESORT, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of July, 1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL DESERT RESORT, INC. for approval of a Tentative Tract Map to create 134 lots on 62.2 acres, in the area encompassing the La Quinta Resort and Club, generally located west of Eisenhower Drive, and south of Avenida Fernando, more particularly described as: A portion of Section 36, T6E, R6E, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 97-340 for this project which states the project will not have a significant impact on the environment based on conditions and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environment; 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 28545: The Tentative Map and its design are consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan 121 E in that its lots are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. 2. The design of the subdivision or its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat because the area covered by the Map is mostly developed and mitigation measures and conditions will be imposed. PCRES-TT28545 Planning Commission Resolution 97- 3. The design of the subdivision and the proposed types of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because urban improvements are existing or will be installed based on applicable Local, State, and Federal requirements. 4. The design of the subdivision and the proposed types of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the Public at large, for access through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently exist and access to the resort residential area will be provided to surrounding property owners. WHEREAS, in the review of this 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: 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 28545 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PCRES-TT28545 Planning Commission Resolution 97- JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PCRES-TT28545 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 97- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28545 KSL RESORTS, INCORPORATED J U LY 8, 1997 GENERAL Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 2. Tentative Tract Map No. 28545 shall comply with the requirements and standards of §§ 66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. This map shall expire two years after approval by the City Council unless extended pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal (requirements to be determined during plan check) • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (per letter of June 16,1997, on file in Community Development Department) • Imperial Irrigation District • California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For subdivisions requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works Department. 4. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. All easements, rights of way and other property rights required of the tentative map or conapppat28545 - r,, U, l; 1 U PLANNING CONBGSSION RESOLUTION NO. 97- TENTATIVE TRACT 28545 JULY 8, 1997 otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the process of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or a waiver of parcel map. The conferral shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of all essential improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels. 6. Prior to approval of a final map, parcel map or grading plan and prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish proof of temporary or permanent easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 7. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties unless the owners specifically agree to the proposed diminishment of access rights. 8. The applicant shall dedicate private street, parking and utility easements or rights of way in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, and as required by the City Engineer except as approved in a revised specific plan for the project area. 9. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 10. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(S) 11. As part of the filing package for final map approval, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions including approved revisions to the plans. If the map is not produced in AutoCad or another format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster image files in place of AutoCad files. conapppM28545 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.97- TENTATIVE TRACT 28545 JULY 8, 1997 IMPROVEMENT PLANS 12. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of 'Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 13. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 14. When final plans are approved by the City, and prior to approval of the final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions including approved revisions to the plans. If the map is not produced in AutoCad or another format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster image files in place of AutoCad files. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 15. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to agendization of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 16. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of conappp=28545 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.97- TENTATIVE TRACT 28545 JULY 8, 1997 improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 17. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the conditions of approval and secure those phases separately, a phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a construction sequencing plan for that phase is approved by the City Engineer. 18. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (plot plans, site development permits, etc.), off -site improvements and development -wide improvements (ie: retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates, etc.) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. GRADING 19. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 20. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 21. The applicant shall comply with the City's flood protection ordinance. 22. The applicant shall furnish a thorough preliminary geological and soils engineering report (the "soils report") with the grading plan. 23. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading plan shall conform conapppat28545 f a ki L lJL _ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.97- TENTATIVE TRACT 28545 JULY 8, 1997 with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 24. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document, bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor, that lists actual building pad elevations for the building lots. The document shall list the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 96.03 and the following: 25. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm shall be retained within the development or in adjacent golf course areas unless otherwise approved in the revised specific plan or by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public or private streets. 26. The applicant shall construct facilities, approved by the City Engineer, which intercept and percolate nuisance water and prevent flow onto golf courses, common areas or off -site locations. The facilities shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. For design purposes, the maximum percolation rate of native soils shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate shall be considered zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data which demonstrates otherwise. 27. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 28. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. 29. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 30. If the applicant proposes drainage of stormwater to off -site locations, the applicant may be required to design and install first -flush storage, oil/water separation devices, or other screening or pretreatment method(s) to minimize conveyance of contaminants to off -site locations. If the drainage will directly or indirectly enter public waterways, the applicant and, subsequently, the applicant and the applicant's successors and assigns shall be responsible for any sampling and testing of effluent which may required under the City's NPDES Permit or other city- or area -wide pollution prevention programs and for any other conapppcxt28545 PLANNING COMNIISSION RESOLUTION NO. 97- TENT'ATIVE TRACT 28545 JULY 8, 1997 obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge of the development's stormwater or nuisance water. The tract CC & Rs shall reflect the existence of this potential obligation. UTILITIES 31. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 32. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for any waived final map, the development or portions thereof may be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street and traffic improvements required herein. 33. The applicant shall be responsible for any off -site traffic improvements shown warranted by the revised traffic study to be submitted with the revised specific plan. 34. All private street, parking and pedestrian improvements shall comply with the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, and current policies except as may be approved in the revised specific plan or by the City Engineer. 35. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the City's standards and practices. 36. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by registered professional engineer(s) authorized to practice in the State of California. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. 37. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for a 20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows: Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.511/6.00" Major Arterial 5.676.50" conapppatt28545 PLANNING CONIlVIISSION RESOLUTION NO.97- TENTATIVE TRACT 28545 JULY 8, 1997 The listed structural sections are minimums, not defaults. Street pavement sections shall be designed using Caltrans design procedures with site -specific data for soil strength and traffic volumes. The applicant shall submit current (no more than two years old) mix designs for base materials, Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, including complete mix design lab results, for review and approval by the City. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (no more than six months old at the time proposed for construction) aggregate gradation test results to confirm that the mix design gradations can be reproduced in production of the base or paving material. Construction operations shall not be scheduled until mix designs are approved. 38. Prior to occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the development, the applicant shall install all street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices and street name signs along access routes to those buildings. If on -site streets are initially constructed with only a portion of the full thickness of pavement, the applicant shall complete the pavement when directed by the City but in any case prior to final inspections of any of the final ten percent of homes within the tract. QUALITY ASSURANCE 39. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 40. The subdivider shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing not included in the City's permit inspection program but which are required by the City to provide evidence that materials and their placement comply with plans and specifications. Testing shall include a retention basin sand filter percolation test, as approved by the City Engineer, after required tract improvements are complete and soils have been permanently stabilized. 41. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 42. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the plan computer files previously submitted to the City to reflect the as -constructed condition. conapppctt28545 �Vv ii't PLANNING CON&HSSION RESOLUTION NO.97- TENTATIVE TRACT 28545 JULY 8, 1997 MAINTENANCE 43. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage, landscaping and on -site street improvements. The applicant shall maintain off -site public improvements until final acceptance of improvements by the City Council. FEES AND DEPOSITS 44. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. MISCELLANEOUS 45. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. 46. The applicant/developer shall comply with the mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan attached to Environmental Assessment 97-340. 47. This map shall be subject to all requirements of SP 121 E, Amendment #4, and SDP 97-607 and shall be revised as necessary prior to recordation. conapppctt28545 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.97- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-607 KSL (DESERT RESORTS, INCORPORATED JULY 8, 1997 GENERAL 1. The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in Site Development Permit 97-607, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. The approved Site Development Permit shall be used within two years of the date of approval, otherwise, it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Used" means the issuance of a building permit. A time extension may be requested as permitted in Municipal Code Section 9.200.080D. 3. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. 4. The project shall incorporate the latest technology in recycling and other means of reducing the amount of waste requiring disposal (land filing), during demolition. Construction, and upon site development/operation. A) prior to issuance of a demolition/building permit, the applicant shall provide proof to the Community Development Department that a recycling company and program has been established for the recycling of construction/demolition debris. B) If the applicant can successfully demonstrate that current provisions exist to meet the requirements of the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991, the Community Development Director may waive, modify, or delete the requirements of this condition. 5. The applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies; as needed: Fire Marshal Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) Conapppcsdp97-607 �Uv1 JL Community Development Department Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department - Desert Sands Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District (per letter of June 25,1997, on file in Community Development Department) Imperial Irrigation District California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. For projects requiring NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works Department. 6. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 7. The project may be phased if a phasing plan is submitted to the Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. A six foot high, solid grouted decorative block wall shall be constructed, if not already existing, adjacent to or across the street from all non -hotel related uses (Tennis Villas, Santa Rosa Cove residences, and any private residences).WalI to be constructed prior to any demolition, grading, site disturbance, or construction on subject property. 9. All new head -in parking spaces shown on east side of Avenida Obregon shall be provided at the time of demolition of the adjacent 82 space parking lot. 10. The windows on the Spa building shall be revised to provide variety in shape and orientation. 11. Existing trees shall be retained or relocated whenever possible. Final landscaping plans, in compliance with all applicable City requirements shall be approved prior to issuance of first building permit authorized by this approval. Conapppadp97-607 _i JL �I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.97- SITE ]DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-607 JULY 8, 1997 12. Site and other applicable plans shall be revised pursuant to requirements of the Historic Preservation Commission prior to issuance of first building permit for "resort residential" units. 13. All applicable conditions of Specific Plan 121 E, Amendment #4, and Tentative Tract 28545 shall be met. 14. Exterior walkway lighting shall be provided. Lighting to be low profile and comply with Municipal Code and not cause annoyance to surrounding properties. Plan to be approved by Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permit. FIRE MARSHAL 15. Fire apparatus roads shall be provided for every building when any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located more than 150 feet from fire apparatus access as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. This requirement shall be complied with prior to issuance of a building permit. 16. Other requirements of the Fire Marshal shall be determined during the plan check process. Conapppcsdp97-607 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AT THE LA QUINTA RESORT AND CLUB LOCATED SOUTH OF AVENIDA FERNANDO, WEST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE. CASE NO.: CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 97-003 KSL RECREATION CORP. AND ITS ASSIGNS WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission did on the 19th day of June, 1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing as requested by KSL Recreation Corporation and its Assigns to allow the construction of 119 new resort residential units within the La Quinta Resort and Club grounds between Avenida Obregon and Calle Mazatlan, south of the Tennis Villa and Tennis Club, more particularly described as follows: A PORTION OF SECTIONS 1 AND 36, T6S, R6E, SBB&M WHEREAS, on the 19th day of June, 1997, the Historic Preservation Commission did adopt Minute Motions 97-011 and 97-012 recommending to the Planning Commission and the City Council, approval of Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make findings to justify the recommendation for approval to the City Council of said Certificate of Appropriateness; and, WHEREAS, the Commission did find the following fact to justify recommending approval of said Certificate of Appropriateness: 1. The proposed construction at the La Quinta Resort and Club is consistent with the recommendations of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for new construction. 2. The Certificate of Appropriateness has been deemed acceptable by the Historic Preservation Commission in that they have determined the proposed 119 resort residential units are architecturally compatible with the historic La Quinta Resort Structures, pursuant to the Secretary of Interior Standards for Historic Preservation. P:\PC Res COA 97-003 4 •'i Planning Commission Resolution 97- Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City cf La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the finds of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council, of the above described Certificate of Appropriateness 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 8th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\PC Res COA 97-003 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 97-003 KSL RECREATION CORP. JULY 8, 1997 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. A current site plan is needed in the report that identifies all structures within the resort campus; as well as their dates of construction. In addition a historic site plan is needed showing the original buildings and those demolished. Was there an original Master Plan for the hotel property? Changes to the La Quinta Hotel Historic Resource Evaluation Report, dated May. 1997: 2. Page 9: (Paragraph 3) The 100's series should be noted on a location map. 3. Page 1: The term "Eclectic" is not a commonly used classification for the style of the buildings. Perhaps the term "Spanish Revival" should be used as it would be the traditional classification nomenclature for this style. 4. Huntsman Trout may have been the landscape architect for the La Quinta Hotel which lends additional support that there may have been a Master Plan for the Hotel development. A clearer discussion of the landscape plans is needed, especially the Quad concept. 5. Page 5: A discussion on how the La Quinta Hotel compares with other resort properties of the time and region is needed. Sanitariums? College campuses? Are there any similarities with other places of time and region, or is the La Quinta Hotel unique? 6. Page 10: (Last paragraph) The original function and location for La Casa needs to be discussed. 7. Page 14: A discussion regarding which criteria (National Register or local) is being used to assess the property needs to be clearly stated in the beginning of the report. 8. In addition, the comments by staff contained in the June 17, 1997, memorandum to Pam O'Connor (on file in the Community Development Department) need to be addressed in the report. PAPC Res COA 97-003 Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Resolution 97- Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 9. A qualified archaeologist shall be required to monitor the project if the grading and trenching if goes below ten feet in depth. 10. A final Archaeological Report shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval. Miscellaneous: 11. Only one story structures shall be constructed next to historic structures to provide a transition between old and new. 12. That the building complex known as "San Vicente", located on the east side of Avenida Obregon, be documented. This house may have been a caretaker's house and is located on the Hotel grounds. P:\PC Res COA 97-003 ..�G�O-L PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-608 KSL RECREATION CORPORATION JULY 8, 1997 GENERAL The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in Site Development Permit 97-608, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. 2. The approved Site Development Permit shall be used within two years of the date of approval, otherwise, it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Used" means the issuance of a building permit. A time extension may be requested as permitted in Municipal Code Section 9.200.080D. 3. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. 4. The project shall incorporate the latest technology in recycling and other means of reducing the amount of waste requiring disposal (land filing), during demolition. Construction, and upon site development/operation. A) prior to issuance of a demolition/building permit, the applicant shall provide proof to the Community Development Department that a recycling company and program has been established for the recycling of construction/demolition debris. B) If the applicant can successfully demonstrate that current provisions exist to meet the requirements of the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991, the Community Development Director may waive, modify, or delete the requirements of this condition. 5. The applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies; as needed: Fire Marshal Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) Community Development Department Conapppcs#97-608 Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department Desert Sands Unified School District Coachella Valley Water District (per letter of June 25,1997, on file in Community Development Department) Imperial Irrigation District California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. For projects requiring NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works Department. 6. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 7. All applicable conditions of Specific Plan 121 E, Amendment #4, shall be met. 8. Exterior lighting shall to be low profile, down shining, and comply with Municipal Code and not cause annoyance to surrounding properties. Top of lights shall not exceed 8 feet in height. Plan to be approved by Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permit. Light shields may be required by the City within first six months after beginning of operation. 9. Prior to issuance of a building permit for this maintenance facility, the applicant shall enter into a secured agreement ensuring demolition of the existing maintenance facility on Avenida Carranza within six months after issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the new facility. The existing facility shall be razed with the site cleared of all rubble and storage, etc., and the soil stabilized to comply with the City's Fugitive Dust Ordinance. 10. The Traffic Analysis submitted for Sp 121 E , Amendment #4, Page VII, shall have recommendation #7 of the Site access/Circulation Plan revised as follows: A) The existing transit stop adjacent to Planning Area II on the south side of 50tn Avenue shall be replaced with a bus turnout and covered shelter meeting the requirements of Sunline Transit and the City Engineer. Conapppcsdp97-608 11. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the property to which they apply. PROPERTY RIGHTS 12. All easements, rights of way and other property rights necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and functioning of improvements shall be acquired or granted, as appropriate, or the process of said acquisition or granting shall be ensured, prior to issuance of a grading permit. Grants shall include additional right of way widths as necessary for dedicated right turn lanes, bus turnouts, etc., included on approved plans. 13. The applicant shall, by grant deed furnished prior to issuance of a grading permit, relinquish access rights from adjacent lots to Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50. Access to these streets shall be limited to the two entry locations proposed for Avenue 50. 14. The applicant shall dedicate public street right of way as follows: a. Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterials) - 50-foot half right of way plus additional area as needed for right -turn lanes and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 15. Prior to approval or a grading plan or issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish proof of temporary or permanent 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. 16. Where public sidewalks are required on privately -owned setback lots, the applicant shall dedicate blanket sidewalk easements over the setback lots. 17. The applicant shall grant any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 18. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall enter into a secured agreement to construct improvements and satisfy obligations required of this site development permit. Security provided shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Conapppcsdp97-608 19. The applicant shall provide approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. 20. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall reimburse the City for improvements made to the south half of Avenue 50 adjacent to this site. 21. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security for one-half of the raised landscape median in Eisenhower Drive which will be constructed by others. IMPROVEMENT PLANS 22. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." Plans for site improvements may be combined on a single plan provided excess clutter doesn't affect readability. All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 23. 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. Conapppcsdp97-608 GRADING 24. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. 25. The applicant shall furnish a thorough preliminary geological and soils engineering report (the "soils report") with the grading plan. 26. The applicant shall comply with the City's flood protection ordinance. 27. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 28. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 29. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document, bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor, that lists actual building pad elevations for the building lots. The document shall list the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 96.03 and the following: 30. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm shall be retained within the development or on adjacent golf course areas unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public or private streets. Conapppcsdp97-608 � t� a s.►.r 4 31. The applicant shall construct facilities, approved by the City Engineer, which intercept and percolate nuisance water and prevent flow onto golf courses, common areas or off -site locations. The facilities shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. For design purposes, the maximum percolation rate of native soils shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate shall be considered zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data which demonstrates otherwise. 32. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 33. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development (or off of the golf course areas) through a designated overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. 34. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 35. If the applicant proposes drainage of stormwater water to off -site locations other than golf course areas, the applicant may be required to design and install first -flush storage, oil/water separation devices, or other screening or pretreatment method(s) to minimize conveyance of contaminants to off -site locations. If the drainage will directly or indirectly enter public waterways, the applicant shall be responsible for any sampling and testing of effluent which may 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 the such discharge of the development's stormwater or nuisance water. UTILITIES 36. All existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. High -voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are exempt from this requirement. 37. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. Conapppcsdp97-608 STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 38. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - Completion of primary arterial street improvements on the south side, including an eight -foot -wide meandering sidewalk/bike path, from the east project boundary to the existing improvements at Eisenhower Drive. The existing median width and alignment shall be modified to provide left turn pockets for westbound traffic at this project's two access/egress drives. The south curbline shall vary between 33' and 37' south of the improvement centerline to conform with the location of the south median curb. The easterly egress drive and median break shall be designed to block left turn movements out of the drive. No deceleration lane shall be installed. Other improvements shall include full landscaping of the raised median on Avenue 50 in the area adjacent to the site and a bus turnout and covered shelter in a location approved by Sunline Transit and the City Engineer. 2. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - Completion of primary arterial street improvements on the east side of the centerline from Avenue 50 south approximately 200 feet to the tract line of tentative map 28334, plus a six-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The east curb line shall be 38' east of the centerline. Provision of cash or security for one-half the cost of the raised landscape median which will be constructed by others. Features contained in the approved construction plans may warrant additional street widths or other measures as determined by the City Engineer. 39. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted to two Avenue 50 access points as follows: A. Avenue 50 One full -turn access located opposite of the existing La Quinta Country Club entry on the north side of Avenue 50. Construction of this access shall include provision of a left -turn pocket in the Avenue 50 median for Conapppcsdp97-608 westbound traffic and modification of the preliminary access plan to provide additional stacking distance and a turnaround for vehicles rejected at the entry gate. One left-in/right-in/right-out drive along the easterly portion of the site located a minimum of 250 feet (curb return to curb return) from the full -turn access to the west.. If the median opening is constructed, it shall include variable median widening from 12' to 16' for approximately 150' west of the opening to accommodate construction of a positive barrier in the opening that restricts left -out turn movements. If the gated entry has an automatic gate, the access area shall be modified to provide additional stacking distance and a turnaround for vehicles rejected at the entry gate. 40. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings and devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 41. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the City's standards and practices. 42. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by registered professional engineer(s) authorized to practice in the State of California. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. 43. Street right of way geometry for culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 44. All streets proposed to serve residential or other access driveways shall be designed and constructed with vertical curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas and to facilitate street sweeping. 45. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for a 20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows: Conapppcsdp97-608 Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" The listed structural sections are minimums, not defaults. Street pavement sections shall be designed using Caltrans design procedures with site -specific data for soil strength and traffic volumes. The applicant shall submit current (no more than two years old) mix designs for base materials, Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, including complete mix design lab results, for review and approval by the City. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (no more than six months old at the time proposed for construction) aggregate gradation test results to confirm that the mix design gradations can be reproduced in production of the base or paving material. Construction operations shall not be scheduled until mix designs are approved. 46. Prior to occupancy of permanent buildings within the development, the applicant shall install all street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices and street name signs along access routes to those buildings. LANDSCAPING 47. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the Avenue 50 perimeter setback areas adjacent to the maintenance facility site and entry drives. 48. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas, medians, common retention basins, and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. 49. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way. Conapppcsdp97-608 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 5-feet of curbs along public streets. 51. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment. 52. The applicant shall lansure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 53. The perimeter wall on 50th Avenue shall meander between 15 and 25 feet from street right-of-way and be eight feet in height. Wall shall be decorative with design approved by Community Development Department prior to issuance of wall permit. 54. 75% of all trees shall be 48" box size and 25% 36" box size, or its equivalent. 55. Planter width along east property line shall be a minimum 30 feet in width. PUBLIC SERVICES 56. The applicant shall provide public transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit and/or the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 57. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 58. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing not included in the City's permit inspection program but which are required by the City to provide evidence that materials and their placement comply with plans and specifications. 59. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 60. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As- Conapppcsdp97-608 Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the plan computer files previously submitted to the City to reflect the as - constructed condition. MAINTENANCE 61. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage, landscaping and on -site street improvements. The applicant shall maintain off -site public improvements until final acceptance of improvements by the City Council. FEES AND DEPOSITS 62. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. MISCELLANEOUS 63. Along the east property line, the wall shall be raised to eight feet in height, If agreed by the adjacent owners of the wall. All costs for such construction shall be borne by the applicants. Easterly gate on 50th Avenue shall be a solid, decorative metal gate. 64. The maintenance building and all related facilities shall be relocated to the west to approximately the middle of the site. The revised preliminary plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. FIRE MARSHAL 65. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 2000 gpm for a 2 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 66. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" x 4" x 2-1/2") will be located not less than 25' or more than 165' from any portion of the buildings as measured along approved vehicular travel ways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrants in the system. 67. Blue retro-reflective pavement markers shall be mounted on private streets, public streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. Prior to installation, placement of markers must be approved by the Riverside County Fire Department. Conapppcs#97-608 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-608 JULY 8, 1997 68. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant/developer shall furnish one blue line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans must be 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". 69. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13 Ordinary Hazard Occupancy, Group . The post indicator valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50' of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25' from the building. 70. System plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for review, along with a plan/inspection fee. The approved plans, with Fire Department job card must be at the job site for all inspections. 71. Install a supervised water flow fire alarm system as required by the UBC/Riverside County Fire Department and National Fire Protection Association Standard 72. 72. Applicant/developer shall be responsible for obtaining underground/aboveground tank permits from both the County Health and Fire Departments. 73. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 74. Install Knox Key Lock boxes, Models 4400, 3200 or 1300, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval of mounting location/position and operating standards. Special forms are available from this office for the ordering of the Key Switch, this form must be authorized and signed by this office for the correctly coded system to be purchased. 75. If the facility requires Hazardous Materials Reporting (Material Safety Data sheets) the Knox Haz Mat Data and Key Storage Cabinet, Model 1220 or 1300 with tamper switches shall be used. Conapppcs#97-608 Is�i'�i�1v�1 ATTACHMENT 2 1 � " 1, 1' � f, ;"- 11 i '.) Ull .,d ,, 54 '�`'`.'?§ JUN 2 3 1997 G i Tv rT f C F AUU11VT4 F : _ , NG 1 iVFORMAT I ON : 062197 1 1 32A EST ¢¢��A"ifVltlr LjEPAKUAW MSGCN : 97172049 .t29f7' 'L�� ORIGIN CITY AND STATE: NEW YORK NY SPECIAL DELIVER'r INSTRUCTIONS: DLV ON "10N 6-23-97 LH uuI%TA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER ?b-.+y5 LALLE TAMPICO `a U i iuTrt CA 92253 REGARD i 146 '4L i i L-L u(- iLE 1 i NG JUu r 8 i H , I L;q- ;.E ARE TENNIS L.UItLU u4jhERS HT 7d-99-4 LF rLLE HAEATLAN. WERE PLOT TOLD L r!EitU'J�L OF !El,) TE llilS LrLIURTS. STRONGLr OBJECT TO THIS. WILL :4D`�E.RSL r AFFECT IALUE OF PROPERT`r . PLEASE NOTE. JACOUELINE AND JOHN ROSENTHAL I June 3, 1997 City Council La Quinta City Hall P. 0. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Ladies and Gentlemen: T J ; JUN 9 Ai i 1153 Mr. & Mrs. Nick Fettis 26116 Mesa Drive Carmel, CA 93923 I w 408-624-7040 1997 My husband and I are the owners of a "Tennis Villa" located at 76936 Calle Mazatlan, La Quinta, California 92253. We understand there is a proposal to construct time share units very close to our home by PGA West / KSL corporation. We do not believe this use in our neighborhood is a benefit. We protest the proposed construction. There would be more noise and traffic and the real estate values would be hurt by this increased density at such a site. Please consider the rights of the residents and property owners of this quiet community. Sincerely, 5 ,//4. ;"l�lC� C Mary Alice Cerrito Fettis Nick Fettis Cynthia Olmstead 1645 San Onofre Drive F; n 49 Pacific Palisades, CA 90271, ;. 310-454-8140 :"i K June 3, 1997 City Council La Quinta City Hall PO Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Ladies and Gentlemen, JUN - 6 1997 J CIf ' I ►vt ING o My husband, Peter Olmstead, and I are the owners of a "Tennis Villa" located at 77-349 Avenida Fernando, La Quinta, CA 92253. The purpose of this letter is to protest the proposed construction of Time Share units in our immediate area by the PGA West / KSL Corporation and to urge you to deny a permit for such construction. The proposed construction is incompatible with the present character of the neighborhood; it would cause increased congestion, noise, and traffic, as well as depress the real estate values. We are asking for your help in protecting our environment. Your consideration of the legitimate rights of all the La Quinta residents and property owners will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, patculw� Cynthia Olmstead Peter Olmstead Frederic J. Kakis , Ph.D. 1534 Harding Street Orange , California 92867 [7141 997-0328 May 30, 1997 City Council La Quinta City Hall P.o. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA.92255 Ladies and Gentlemen: JUN " 2 1997 ✓i J CITY OF LAVUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT My wife and I are the owners of a "Tennis Villa" located at 77104 Calle Mazatlan,La Quinta, Ca.92253. The purpose of this letter is to protest the proposed construction of Time Share units in our immediate area by the PGA West / KSL corporation and to urge you to deny a permit for such construction. The proposed construction is incompatible with the present character of the neighborhood, it would cause increased congestion noise and traffic and depress the real estate values. We are asking for your help in protecting our environment. your consideration of the legitimate rights of all the La Quinta residents and property owners will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Frederic J. Kakis, Ph.D. Mathilda Kakis rJ �J li e,i J RANDOLPH LINEHAN 50028 CALLE OAXACA P.O. BOX 1850 LA QUINTA, CA 92253 19 June 1997 Community Development Department City of La Quinta La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Notice Santa Rosa for 8 July Dear Sirs: of Public Hearing: Cove and La Quinta 1997 at 4:00 PM: ECEME, JUN 2 3 1997 CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT Items Concerning Resort, scheduled I am very concerned that a hearing concerning a construction project which directly effects myself and my neighbors in Santa Rosa Cove is being held during a period of time when the majority of the owners and my neighbors will not be in La Quinta, and that the notice, as in my case, has probably been shipped to the La Quinta address of their property and not to (or in duplicate) the permanent address of the owner of record of property in Santa Rosa Cove. As is well known at City Hall, Santa Rosa Cove is primarily a weekend, seasonal, or second home development surrounding the La Quinta Hotel. Most owners are not in residence during the summer and would likely not be able to attend or even receive your notice for a summer session involving their property interests. Presuming they did receive your notice, and had an interest to attend, the scheduling of your meeting on a Tuesday, a mid -week date, would be a hardship requiring a special trip out to La Quinta in the middle of the summer, when few are likely to show -up or attend such a meeting. Assuming you are not "disingenuous" in this matter, I would think that you would want the principal group of citizens to be effected by this construction program to know of plans you have authorized and have their input. As our major function in your community over the last 17 years has been to contribute taxes, and produce weekend or seasonal personal spending, including disproportionately high restaurant, remodelling, furniture, and luxury items purchases, without use of your city's tax supported services (non-use of libraries, parks, clean-ups, street paving, schools, police services within development etc.): I would think that the least you would want to do to conserve our community's good will is to give us better and more detailed information of what you're permitting KSL (a new resident corporation in the city) to construct, what it will look like, when it will construct it (especially if it is to occur during the "season") and how it will effect us, principally in the way of: 1) Esthetics 2) Entry and Egress through our Gates at Avenue 50 and Avenida Fernandez 3) Construction time and disturbances and 4) Effect on present home _'�z,1 ,' prices by building a further surplus of new construction which will further lower prices of property in our development 5) Impact on Santa Rosa cove with hotel and construction workers utilising our streets to get to construction site and later work on a daily basis. Obviously, the solution to any misunderstandings would have been for the group requesting the permit, KSL, and the city to have sent out to all of the owners in Santa Rosa Cove detailed information concerning these items during the "season," and permitting us all to attend a meeting with their staff and the city during the "season" concerning these vital interests. I understand that the city is principally interested in construction permit fees and possible jobs. However, added daily traffic on Eisenhower, and on Calle Mazatlan, through the security gates on Avenue 50 and Avenida Fernandez, as well as construction, noise, construction and hotel workers wandering through our "security" development, more surplus properties for sale (competing with and further lowering prices in our development), and the thought of a large employee parking lot across the street from our development (with employees entering and passing through our development on a daily basis?), as well as expanded service needs for the resort and new properties using our development as a pass through: directly does effect our interests in this city. Maybe you would be kind enough to address these important issues effecting our community, and explain why you would schedule such an important hearing and the viewing of documents regarding this construction program at such an insensitive and inconvenient time of the year. Cordially, Ra dolph L neh Owner 50 8 Calle Oaxaca, Santa Rosa Cove La Quinta, CA 922532 0 E C E � VE 2 s � JUN I 1 TA PLANN! G E CITY OF ARTMENT City of La Quinta Planning Commission Re: Specific Plan 12 1 E-Applicant KSL Recreation Corporation June 25, 1997 The Duna La Quinta Homeowners Association strongly opposes the zoning changes and proposed building sought by KSL Recreation in the 17.6 acres at the Southeast corner of 50th Avenue and Eisenhower Drive bordered to the east by our property line. Simply put, the proposal by KSL to erect a golf -course equipment and maintenance garage barely more than 100 feet from a quiet, quality residential neighborhood is ludicrous. The attendant noise would commence at early dawn and extend into the night. The proposed parking lot sprawl, a mere 10 feet from our backyards, would further add to the problem. It is an arrogant effront to the many who purchased homes years ago in good faith based on the knowledge that the area west of Duna La Quinta was zoned low - density residential. To change the zoning and allow the building of a garage would have a devastating effect on property values. Also, an increase from low -density to moderate density in the area apart from the garage and round-the-clock parking would further downgrade the region. We contend that there are other locations on KSL property distant from established residential areas that are more suitable for the erection of such a complex. The timing of this proposal is most unfortunate, for so many of our homeowners are out of state on their summer recess. These homeowners, numbering over 100, are prevented from stating their views personally at the Public Hearing, which in all fairness, should be postponed until October -November. They have communicated their objections, however, to the undersigned and other members of the La Quinta Homeowners Association Board of Directors. We will speak to the issues involved at the Public Hearing July 8, 1997 at 4 PM in the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber. Respectfully submitted, Wa a Connell ayne Nystro Glenn Pfeil Vice President resident President Villa Vista HOA Duna Gardens HOA Duna La Quinta Owners #1 uB 27 97 FRI 16:35 FAX 40,13 476 (1356 KI\KUS (.aPIDILA Zof)2 June 24, 1997 Chairman Jacques Abel La Quinta Planning Commission RE: Public Hearing on KSL expansion on Ju,y 3, 1997 Della Davis ;-Homeowner's Association Mountain Estates La Quinta Mailing Address: P.O. Box 13315.311 Oakland, CA94619 'We are requesting a continuance of the public hearing scheduled for this date. It is a fact that La Quinta is a seasonal resort, and the majority of homeowners who will be affected by these changes are out of ^own. We object to a public hearing taking place when the public cannot attend. Secondly, the documents outlining their proposed changes (Amendment #41 and the environmental assessment is not available for the public to read, since, according to the planning department, it is net ready yet. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter Sincerely, Della Davis JUN 2 0 1997 LUiLlL CITY OF LAGIUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT A *******Dr. Stuart L. Farber 350 Monrovia Ave. Long Beach, California 90803 * * * * * * * Mr. Jerry Herman Ll Director, Community Development Department JUN 2 6 1997 City of La Quinta Calif. 92253 CITY OF LA(1UINTA Dear Mr. Herman: PLANNING DEPARTMENT This letter is regarding the "notice of Public Hearing" scheduled for July 8, 1997 concerning the KSL Recreation Corp. and their requests numbered one (1) through seven (7) see attached, and environmental assessment #97-340. As a long time homeowner and tax payer, over sixteen years, in the Santa Rosa Cove Resort community, I am demanding that the KSL request #6 on the indicated document be disapproved. The KSL Corp. request # 6 currently reads as follows: Req.#6. "Approval of site development permit to allow construction of golf course/hotel maintenance complex, including a 19,440 square foot building and parking lot for all hotel and golf course employees on 6.2 acres located on the south side of 50th. avenue, approvixately 210 feet east of Eisenhower Drive." My demand is based upon the following reasons: 1. Increased security problems resulting from the increased and difficult to control worker foot traffic going through the SRC main gate at Eisenhower and 50th, through the dense residential area of SRC to and from their respective work sites. 2. The heavy increase of maintenance equipment, materials and personnel through the gate of Eisenhower and 50th.street and residential areas to and from various work stations and repair sites. 3. A significant increase of noise, morning, noon and evening , in and around the maintenance and employee parking complex. The noise will be continual and on- going from the maintenance/parking lot areas carrying to residential areas in SRC. 4. Increased safety and accident problems resulting from the maint. equipment traffic through the SRC main gate, onto Matzatlan and through the residential areas of SRC. 5. Increased pollution from cars, trucks, shuttles, equipment and other traffic from the maintenance parking area through the SRC residential areas, especially in and around phases 1 and 2 of SRC. (those residential areas in immediate proximity to the main gate). .r l U, J 1 11 6. Significant decrease in the "well being" of the homeowners of SRC affected by continuous traffic, congestion, noise, pollution and security and safety risks. 7. Lowering of property values, due to increased and continual noise, pollution, traffic, safety and security problems resulting from the use of the proposed maintenance complex and parking lot for all hotel and golf course employees. KSL Corp. request # 2 & #3 : I am also strongly requesting that the KSL Corp. requests number 2 and 3 be disapproved. Most of the homeowners and professional real estate brokers in the area are of the opinion that the area is already too dense and additional persons and traffic would be excessive and not in the best interest of the homeowners, both current and those to come. I am further strongly requesting that the hearing date currently set for July 8, 1997 on the indicated KSL requests, be postponed for at least ninety (90) days. This will provide the SRC Home Owners Association members some time to study the requests more thoroughly and to provide discussion and opportunities for their input and appropriate action on the subject. I am further requesting that the environmental assessment #97-340 be reconsidered to include that impact upon the resident and residential areas immediately effected by the increased foot traffic, noise, pollution,security and safety hazards resulting from the proposed maintenance complex and employees parking lot. In this regard, I am requesting a copy of the Environmental Assessment #97-340. I look forward to receiving the assessment within 7 working days. Finally„ As a former Commissioner (Economic Planning and Development) for the City of Long Beach, may I add that I have great difficulty with the planning of a maintenance and staff parking lot at the front gate of a resort community. Maintenance and parking goes to the least disruptive and conspicuous areas of a complex, usually to the rear and certainly not at the front entrance. Sincerely Dr. Suart L. Farber cc: Mr. Craig Hammill, SRC Home Owners Association, President Mr. Jacque Abels, Chair, La Quinta Planning Commission Mr. Stan Sawa, Planning Department Honorable Mayor Glenda Holt, City of La Quinta KSL Recreation Corp. Larry E. Lichliter, Exec. Vice President (- 11 � '-, Vernon A. r" 12201 Meadow Potomac, Mare 1 20854 i ' {� JUN 2 6 1997 � I J CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT In✓ b wt4�l C . ��,_y S ��,,�,�►->Ct�tL�� `'Ltd �u rAt 61 liliY) c,Y.��czr� o�n �'aill- Z" - U }-U�tz�i"✓� � . C AL-- A/CK �J-flctZ t/ �j�Iill�I C.f✓ `�- IXCIGiuZ- - �/ , , 1 .a June 23, 1997 City of La Quinta Planning Commission 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 JUN 24 1097 s., 91 LA -- ' CITY OF LAQJINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT Re: Planning Commission Notice of Public Hearing Dated June 17, 1997 Applicant: KSL Recreational Corporation Gentlemen: We have lived across the street from KSL's present maintenance facility for over two years, and have had to constantly put up with an extreme amount of noise, dust and safety hazards. While we are pleased to see KSL relocating the maintenance facility, we would like to see included in the overall plan a definite completion date for removal of the present facility. Hopefully, this plan would include razing the present maintenance building, removal of unsightly chainlink fencing, regrading the parking facility, and removal of the huge sand and equipment stockpile and accumulated debris and weeds. However, in reading over the above -mentioned notice and viewing the Planning Commission plot plan, there is no mention made of what is planned for the present facility at Avenida Carranza and Calle Tampico (vacated). As you know, improvement of this area has been delayed for more than nine years, and we would like to see an acceptable, timely conclusion. We plan to attend the public hearing on July 8 at 4:00 p.m., and request that this situation be addressed. Sincerely, Leo K. Miller ALOUis4e- Miller 51-040 Avenida Carranza La Quinta, CA 92253 ELAINE J. RHOADES LEGAL ASSISTANT JOHN C. FISHER ATTORNEY AT LAW 975 OAK STREET, SUITE 780 EUGENE, OREGON 97401 City of La Quinta Planning Commission La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La, Quinta, CA 92253 TELEPHONE (541) 485-3153 FACSIMILE (541) 485-6736 In reply: Refer to ML C 1 1997 June 25, 1997 �,) i r OF LAuuGv FF PLANNAG DEPARTMI Re: Public Hearing Set for July 8, 1997 Specific Plan 121E, Amendment #4, General Plan Amendment 97-054, Zone Change 97-083, Tentative Tract 28545, Site Development Permits 97-607, 97-608, Environmental Assessment 97-340 Certificate of Appropriateness 97-003 Dear Sirs: The undersigned represents Nels E. Sandstrom and Myna T. Sandstrom. Mr. and Mrs. Sandstrom reside at 77-321 Camino Quintana in La Quinta. In response to your Notice of Public Hearing, the Sandstroms register the following protests: 1. The scheduling of this important hearing during summer months when many, even most, of the Santa Rosa Cove homeowners are not in residence is highly unfair. The timing of the application appears intended to frustrate the policy behind the public hearing process, given the number of residents h%—O are cut of to n. KSL recreation Corp's application in July appears to have been made without consideration of the reasons residents of the Cove purchased homes there --peace, quiet and without traffic congestion and accompanying smog. 2„ The Sandstroms vehemently protest the proposed development along Camino Quintana in multi -unit dwellings. The strip along Camino Quintana was zoned for condos with the same architectural design as the rest of Santa Rosa Cove. Permitting the change will have a negative impact on the existing development. 3 The Sandstroms request denial of multi -unit development of that area between the tennis villas and Camino Quintana. Page 2 June 25, 1997 Re: Public Hearing Set for July 8, 1997 97-054, 97-083 97-607 97-608, 97_-340 and 97-003 Given the opportunity to testify, my clients can produce evidence that KSL has consistently disregarded adherence to noise pollution abeyance and frequently violated rental control provisions of the CC&R's of Santa Rosa Cove. Very truly yours, John C\►X*sher JCF: cc: Mf. anal Mrs. Nels Sandstrom 1 June 30, 1997 The Community Development Department. -- La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico - La QWnta, CA 92253 J U L 0 2 1997 RE: ALL ITEMS MENTIONED IN APPLICATION OF KSL CST',' CF- _N h RECREATION CORP. AND ITS ASSIGNS PLANK:i ;G �E_.Aj� T �1ENT (SP 121E, ZONE CHANGE 97-083, SDP 97-608; AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS 97-003): KSL LAND CORP. & ITS ASSIGNS (GPA 97-054): KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC. (TT 28545 & SDP 97-607) GREETINGS: Mrs. Beverly K. Freitas is the record owner of the La Quints Terrors Was unit whose address is 77-321 Avenida Fernando, La Quints, CA, 92253. As such owner Mrs. Freitas does hereby register her omnibus protest against each and every of the many requests presented by the Applicant in connection with the above-entided proceedings. The NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING mailed to Mrs. Frohn at that La Quinta Tennis Was address was forwarded to her at her home at 1002 Rodeo Road in Pebble Beach, California, 93953 and was received that June 30, 1997. Lake most other owners of property affected by these proceedings, Mrs Fredas does not reside in La Quisrta during the oppressive heat of the summer months, which is perhaps why so frequently developers initiate their applications for Unpopular Zone changes, etc., during those periods when it is most difficult for their opponents to submit their objections. The following caveat is excerpted from the received NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: "If you chafiexge tJke decision of tikis care in cow4 you may be firniNd to raising only &ose issues Mar you or someone else lkar raised ether at dke Public Hearing or is wrteu corresponAnce ddhwed to die Community Devdopment a4 or prior to, the Public Hearing. " The disclosure of that bit of legal information is appreciated as it is not something commonly known by recipients of such notice. We non-professional owners need help m these types of situations. In addition to the foregoing Mrs. Freitas also protests the lack of time from the date of the sending of the notices (most of which will require forwarding by the La Quinta Post Office to other addresses far and wide, marry of than outside of the State of California) until the time of the Public Hearing. In this case that period is less than two weeks, interrupted by the Fourth of July holiday weekend; and July is the most popular month of the year for vacations by members of the legal profession who are needed now by almost every owner involved m this matter. It is self-evident that there are innumerable complex issues raised by the Applicant's mitiatiag petition No doubt their attorneys, engineers, etc., have labored long and hard over the preparation for the presentation and conduct of their side of ft care. is it fair that we owners who may need to consult and confer with sinnlar professionals should have only these few days to oppose those who come so well fortified by years of preparation with expert representatives? Is it reasonable to expect owners, not similarly trained and experienced in this intricate field of adcninistrativ+e law, need no morn than two weeks to achieve equal expertise with which to protect their residential properties again commercial adulteration? The City of La Quints is compelled by law to provide due process in these proceedings, hence tt NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING mailed to all of the owners of any residential units within the Saco Rosa Cove area between the Mazatlan Gate and the Avenida Fernando Gate. The due process inchub notice which is fair and reasonable under the circumstances of a given situation. The reason for 0 notice is not merely to Inform. The purpose is to give a reasonable opportunity to do the necessac to respond to the notice with protective action. Less than two weeks of working days does not ma that criteria. More time must be provided to allow these owners to learn what it is that the develop wishes to do, and then to determine what; if anydmg, should be done to protect against it, and then I engage someone with professional expertise to contest with the Applicant's hired experts. In summary, this protest is against all that the developer requests; it has to be that at this tin because this owner has no practical means of ascertaining what changes in the status quo are beu planned In particular it is directed to the insufficient time allowed within which the owner will be allows to protect her single family residence; also, against any increase in the density which has so happui prevailed in the neighborhood during all of the years of its existence; and to the commercialization of tf residential environment by the overflow of the large hotel operations beyond where they previously wee allowed We bought into a strictly residential neighborhood, with a lovely hotel next -door, let us keep that way? Dated and signed this 3& day of June, 1997. BEVERLY K. AS I ♦W n►rices TROY & GOULD Mamma WN►ICLO MAV"A. JAIN F"OFC68104AL COROOORArION 15TVAN KNKO ♦4W me 4 MIN O. cck"N . OWNWNV►. w, ULWman WWAN o. II..OK 601 CENTURY PARK EAST, 46" FLOOR PRANK w Go~.4"M i cq- s s ig"WAV W MwANew ewwo r �� iO"" 64 C"AM T� DAWN a AA.L° w°1eOf "' JANNg a LOCw;^R" LOS ANOGLES, CALIFORNIA 00ow-a'ey DAND a WONLsawO bC"t M KAN w. O .. Mw,.. ICISLAA�J, RU Mw a PIA RUM w ►uKAwe JAftZNCS A JANew A wa+a►.. �� I.. SAnaCw 4 OKL TIM♦:PMONE 1]IO) s82-4441 wNNpL I. p►AKR NONALD 6. wOAeN 064~ w *OLD 6ftV"WNC9 604NA" TELECOPICR 1310) a0I-47AS Lwml. T. OOL08L.M DA69 c SNOW aww. M 600D NOCNAEL a GVeeeA V.IIAIAN D. ODULD /MAP 6, K1wP4e2 EAK a CORMN JOKMI F. TMOV AA► POAD J NLLA"609 MARK W IA,Nf NATAAVM L WANZAN July 3, 1997 r1L6 NO VIA FACSIMILE AND a.S. WL Planning Commission. City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quint$, California 92253 I Lam..- u � L 1, J U L 0 to 1997 J CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT Re: application of KSL Recreation, Corn Gentlemen: I am writing to oppose the above application, which will be heard at your July B meeting. I own a Condominium on Calle Mazatlan, close to the La Quint& Tennis Club, but I will not be able to leave Los Angeles to attend the hearing. I have the following comments: 1. i am dismayed that KSL decided to present this matter during the summer, without reasonable notice to the affected residents of Santa Rosa Cove. KSL has obviously been preparinq this plan for a very long time. Very few homeowners remain in Santa Rosa Cove during the summer, and we have not had any chance to see the details of the plan. If KSL had wanted to treat us fairly and honestly, it would have given us the details well in advance so that we could understand the ramifications and discuss with KSL ways to improve the proposal. 2. I cannot determine whether item 2 in your notice, which requests a zone change in density for the northeast corner of Calle Mazatlan and Camino Quintana, affects property that is part of Santa Rosa Cove. I do not have the condominium documents with me, but I think the density cannot be increased without homeowner consent. ATTY\N.TP\COA.006 P 17 »:9-9i; LLL6t9 =gtLt 109 01E : Wet : 46-6 -L ! (an v A0&:a i\3S LAW OFFIC65 TROY & QOULD PROPL. 5101AL CORPORATIC" Planning Commission July 3, 1997 ?age 2 3. It appears that most of the traffic going to the new residential units will use Calle Mazatlan for access, rather than Avenida Obregon. This will have a drastic impact on the privacy and serenity of the residents in the cul-de- sacs on the west side of1Ce Mazatlan. 4. A major concern is that the additional units will be used in time-share arrangements, resulting in a great many transient occupants. This will vastly increase the noise, commotion, traffic, and security problems, and will greatly detract from the comfort of the Santa Rosa Cove owners and the value of their properties. The suggestion in your notice, that we are entitled to review the public file at your offices, is useless. Clearly, we have no opportunity to review the file when we are at our summer homes. For obvious reasons, I urge the Planning Commission and the City Council to postpone any decision to approve KSL's plans until at least October, so that I and my fellow homeowners can have a fair chance to figure out whether these plans need to be changed. I invite you to contact me if a.0 would like to discuss this further. Thank you for your consideration. very rul yours, William J. eis WJF/co CC: La Quinta City Council KrTY\WJF1COR.006 1J if _IL ice! � 1 0 :C' i11ceTi1>>fZTQ 4-gtLt 10Z 0TQ : 10:01 : L6-9 -L : Q"i.lm !y A021L'A9 1.ti3S SENT BY:TROY & GOULD : 7- 3-V : 13:00 : 310 201 4746- 6197777133:T 1/ 3 TROY & GOULD PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 1801 Century Park East, 16th Floor Los Angeles, California 90067 'telephone (310) 553-4441 Fax (310) 201-4746 Facsimile Transmission Company: City of La Quinta Contact: Planning Commission Fax Number: 760-777-7155 Tel. Number: 30-777-7000 Copies to: Date: July 3, 1997 Sender: William J. Fels Message: The wtformation contained in this facsimile message is attorney -client privileged and confidenriat information intended only for rho use of the individual or entity named above. N the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the emobyee of agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strivVy prohibited, if you have received this communication in errvr, please immediately notify us by telephone, and return the odginsi message to us at the above address via the U.S. Postal Service. Thank you. Number of pages: 3 File No.: 9990-0 Date/Time sent: HARD COPY TO FOLLOW 8Y MAIL El i tl i J .1 k.4 SENT BY:408 476-Oa56 fax 7- 29:11:19.0 k:nko's capitola— 6197777155:# 2! 2 La Quinta Planning Commission 78.495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA Mr. and Mrs. Steve Davis 45.780 Via Sierra La Quinta, CA 92253 July 2,1997 Dear Members of the Planning Commission: J/ .1UL C 2 1997 ' Ji V r We oppose specific parts of the KSL development plant scheduled for hearing on July 8. We Oppose Rem 1, approval of specific plan amendment #4 to update plan and to allow new development. The planned changes in density and most importantly, the planned changes from residential to tourist -commercial zoning are not acceptable to us. We have invested quite a lot of money to purchase and deve)op lots in the surrounding areas. At the time of our due diligence the general plan was for the area to be law or medium density residential. Since it has been zoned this way for so long, and through so many developments, we could not imagine the planning commission approving a change of this. This will negatively impact our investments and we ask you to deny any changes in density and land use. We Oppose items Z & 3 which again change the number of units allowed per acre by virtue of the denstyy change. Our purchase of exclusive and expensive land and home was based on the general plan which allowed low or medium density residential only. This change will Impact the whole community of La Quinta, and should not be allowed. It is unfair to change the zoning after so much of the community surrounding La Quinta Resort has completed its development. Individual homeowners have invested huge amounts of money to complete upscale development, complete with open space and ambiance. This type of density will negatively impact the existing homeowners. We also oppose item 5, approval of a site development permit, since the density of the area is currently medium density, 4.8 units per acre. The proposed density is 10 units per acre. We definitely want this denied, and the density maintained at 4.8 units per acre, as indicated in the general plan. We do not want the site development permit approved for the hearth spa, since the area would have to be rezoned tourist -commercial for this, and we oppose strongly the rezoning of residential into tourist commercial. We would like to speak in opposition to this proposed development, and request the clerk schedule us on the agenda for the July 8th meeting. Sincerely, 07'02/97 I;ED 11:16 FAX 408 476 03559� KI%K0S CAPIFOLA 4002 'TO: Mr. Jacques Abel La Quinta Planning Commission FROM. Della Davis Mountain Estates Homeowners Association JUL 02 1997 "Mailing Address: 102 Grand Ave Capitola, CA 95010 CI T Y GF Lk:yIJIN TA PLANPJING F)EPARTMENT Re: KSL Expansion We would like the Planning Commission to deny or postpone the planned expansion that KSL is attempting to fast track through the Planning Commission and City Council. The "Public Notice" that was given was sent out at a time when the majority of the homeowners in the developments surrounding the resort are out of town. This does not constitute effective public notice, and in fact only serves KSL's purposes by making sure that no one has an opportunity to effectively investigate the expansion and oppose it if necessary. It is a fact that La Quinta and the desert communities are seasonal towns, and only in the season from November until May are most homeowners in town. They are not available to read Ietters mailed to them at their La Quinta addresses, and thusly, are not being adequately notified of this expansion. Secondly, the materials referenced in the Public Notice, i.e., the Environmental Assessment and the Planning Commission Staff report are as of this date, July 2nd, still not available for the public to read. Given that these are lengthy materials, covering many changes, the public is not being given adequate time to oppose or approve the expansion. This is another reason to deny or postpone all actions on their many zoning change requests. We ask specifically, that in addition to postponing or denying the requests 1 through 7, as they relate to Plan 121E, Amendment #4, that all site development permits, 97-607, 97- 608, and the Environmental Negative Mitigation acceptance be denied, until the public has a genuine chance to study the proposed changes, and until the majority of the homeowners in the surrounding developments are aware of the proposed zoning changes. Lastly, the proposed changes are not in keeping with the general plan. KSL is asking that the general plan be changed from residential, low density, to either residential medium density, or worse, to tourist commercial. Changing residential to tourist commercial is not acceptable to members of our association. Our members have invested millions of dollars in real estate development, based on the city of La Qulnta's general plan, which called for the area at issue to be low or medium density residential, not tourist commercial. Please stop the fast -track tactics of KSL, and give the public an opportunity to voice their opinion. Please deny or postpone until November 1997, any and all action on this proposed expansion. PH #B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JULY 8, 1997 CASE NO.: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 97-056 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA LOCATION: HIGHWAY I I I REQUEST: PROHIBIT INDEPENDENT USED VEHICLE SALES, EXCLUDING NEW VEHICLE SALES WITH ASSOCIATED USED VEHICLE SALES IN THE REGIONAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BACKGROUND: Staff is recommending that independent used vehicle sales, not associated with new vehicle sales be prohibited within the Regional Commercial Zoning District. This Zoning District is generally located on the north and south sides of Highway 111. Under a Conditional Use Permit, independent used vehicle sales will be allowed in the Commercial Park Zoning District only. Highway I I I is designated within the Circulation Element of the General Plan as a Primary Image Corridor. A Primary Image Corridor is defined as "streets in the roadway network which are the urban design statements of the City." To ensure the preservation of the existing and future landscape and architectural image of this Corridor as well as retain the quality of businesses, independent used vehicle sales will be prohibited. A non -conforming used vehicle sales facility exists along Highway 111. The use was approved by the Planning Commission on a temporary basis. The Use Permit will expire on October 10, 1997. This use will not be granted a time extension if the Ordinance for this Zoning Code Amendment is adopted. This used vehicle car sales facility is representative of the potential threat to the General Plan goal of enhancing Highway 11 as a Primary Image Corridor. Attached is the resolution which includes the Findings necessary to recommend approval of this Zoning Code Amendment. RECOMMENDATION: Move to adopt Planning Commission adopt Resolution 97- recommending to the City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 97-056. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF AL QUINTA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL PROHIBITION OF INDEPENDENT VEHICLE SALES, EXCLUDING NEW VEHICLE SALES WITH ASSOCIATED USED VEHICLE SALES IN THE REGIONAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, SECTION 9.80.040, TABLE 801 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 97-056 CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 8" day of July, 1997, hold duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a Zoning Ordinance Amendment for the prohibition of used vehicle sales excluding new vehicle sales with associated used vehicle sales in the Regional Commercial District: and, WHEREAS, it has been determined due to their product advertising, display and storage needs, have operational characteristics which are objectionable under certain conditions and in certain locations; and, WHEREAS, said used vehicle sales, excluding new vehicle sales with associated used vehicle sales, if not appropriately sited or developed, negatively impact surrounding businesses and residents; and, WHEREAS, there is a deterioration in the quality of businesses which choose to locate near used vehicle businesses not associated with new vehicle sales businesses; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that such uses require special land use and development consideration because of their unique operational and locational characteristics, especially as they relate to Highway 111, a Primary Image Corridor; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that non -conforming used vehicle sales represent an increasing threat to the quality of Highway 111, a Primary Image Corridor; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission desires to minimize and control these adverse impacts and thereby protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens, preserve quality of life, preserve property values and the character of surrounding neighborhoods and business districts, and deter the spread of urban blight; and, RESOPC-ZOAusedcars.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 97- WHEREAS, said request has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental quality Act of 1970 (as amended), and adopted by City Council Resolution 83-68, in that the Community Development Director has determined that the project could not have any significant adverse effect on the physical environment; therefore, the project is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); and, 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. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 97-056 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as noted in Exhibit "A". PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held this 8t" day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RE SOPC-7.OAusedcars.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 97- WHEREAS, said request has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended), and adopted by City Council Resolution 83-68, in that the Community Development Director has determined that the project could not have any significant adverse effect on the physical environment; therefore, the project is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3); and, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 97-056 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as noted in Exhibit "A". PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held this 8' day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC-7.OAusedcars.wpd 9.80: PERMITTED NONRESIDENTIAL USES TABLE 801: PERMITTED USES IN NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS DISTRICT P = Principal Use M = Minor Use Permit y A= Accessory Use T= Temporary Use Permit C = Conditional Use Permit X = Prohibited Use Rio 0 0 •�° o F LAND USE CR CP CC CN CT CO MC Timeshare facilities, subject to §9.60.280 C X C X C I X X Bed and breakfast inns Revised 4/97) X X X X X X X Caretaker residences M M M M M M M Automotive Uses (subject to §9.100.120, Outdoor Storage and Display) Automobile service stations, with or without minimart C C C C X X X Car washes C C C X X X X Auto body repair and painting; transmission repair X C X X X X X Auto repair specialty shops, providing minor auto C C C X X X X maintenance: tire sales/service, muffler, brake, lube and tune-up Svcs -- not including major engine or drivetrain repair Auto and motorcycle sales and rentals C C X X X X X Used vehicle sales, not associated with a new vehicle sales X C X X X X X facility Truck, recreation vehicle, and boat sales C C X X X X X Truck and/orequipment rentals C C X X X X X Auto parts stores, with no repair or parts installation on the P P P C X X X remises Auto or truck storage yards, not including dismantling X C X X X X X Private parking lots/garages as a principal use subject to C C C X C C X Chapter 9.150, Parkin Warehousing and Heavy Commercial Uses subject to §9.100.120, Outdoor Storage and Display) Wholesaling/distribution centers, with no sales to C P X X X X X consumers General warehouses with no sales to consumers C P I X X X X X 80-7 BI #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: J U LY 8, 1997 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-611 REQUEST: APPROVAL OF NEW PROTOTYPE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE PLANS FOR TRACT 27899 (MONTECITO AT LA QUINTA NORTE) LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILES AVENUE AND ADAMS STREET APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: TOPAZ ASSOCIATES, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP BUILDER: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES (DBA CENTURY HOMES) REP: MR. DENNIS CUNNINGHAM, PROJECT MANAGER ARCHITECT: BENJAMIN AGUILAR AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: R. J. CUNNINGHAM COMPANY ZONING: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) CEQAIMPACT ANALYSIS: THIS APPLICATION IS EXEMPT FROM CEQA UNDER GUIDELINES SECTION 15303(a); NEW CONSTRUCTION OF SMALL STRUCTURES BACKGROUND: Proiect Location/Tract History The proposed development is located at the southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street. Tentative Tract Map 27899 was approved by the City Council on February 1, 1994 for 111 single family lots on public streets under Resolution 94-15 (Attachment 1 - Map Exhibit). A one year time extension was approved by the City Council on June 4, 1996 under Resolution 96-39. On May 20, 1997, the City Council reviewed and approved the final map application. To date, the Map has not been recorded. STRPSDP611-16/CONDSDP611-16 Page 1 of 5 Tract 27899 is located to the west of Tract 26188 (Del Rey) and Tract 25363. Both of these single family developments were built by Century -Crowell Communities in the last few years. Portions of Tract 25363 have yet to be completed. Existing houses in both Tracts range in size from approximately 1,400 to more than 2,000 square feet. The existing houses are one- or two -stories with stucco building walls and concrete tile roofing. Front -yard landscaping and perimeter walls were provided by the developer when the houses were constructed. Condition 57 of Tract Map 27899 states: "The applicant shall submit complete detailed or architectural elevations for all units, for Planning Commission review and approval as a Business Item prior to building permit issuance. The architectural standards shall be included as part of the C. C. and R's (if any). The latter shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review." Development Request Century Homes is proposing two product lines for Tract 27899. The first being a continuation of the Del Rey series, which was used in Tracts 26188 and 25363 on Lots 1- 38, and the new Montecito series on Lots 39-111. A summary of each Plan type is shown below: nal Rev Series Plan 2X Plan 2 Plan 3/3X Plan 4/4X Plan 5/5X 1,460 sq. ft. 1,800 sq. ft. 1,445/1,663 sq. ft. 1,567/1754 sq. ft. 1,678/2,010 sq. ft. 4 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 3 Bedroom (Optional4th 3 Bedroom (Optional4"' 3 Bedroom (Optional4th Bedroom Bedroom) Bedroom) 2 car garage 2 car garage 2 or 3 car garage 2 car + bonus 2 or 3 car garage One Story One Story One Story Two Story One Story �_:--*- — 9--r-4. 7R4ask Note: The Del Rey prototype house plans were approvea oy the riannuig k.I�:laaawlI IVi I Ia...� �...... and 25363 in 1994 and 1996, respectively. Unntari+n SP_rins Plan 1 - 1,450 sq. V Plan 2 - 1,803 sq. ft. " Plan 3 - 2,166 sq. V Plan 4 - 2,240 sq. ft. 3 Bedroom (Optional 4th bedroom) 3 Bedroom (Optional 4th bedroom) 4 Bedroom (Optional 5th bedroom) 3 Bedroom 2 or 3 car garage 2 or 3 car garage 3 car garage 3 car garage One Story One Story One Story One Story Note (*): The square footage of each house excludes bonus option. STRPSDP611-16/CONDSDP611-16 Page 2 of 5 The floor plans show house sizes from approximately 1,450 to 2,240 square feet of livable area with 2- or 3-car garages. Most houses are single -story except for Plan 4 of the Del Rey series. Front -loaded garages are being offered. Rear yard patio covers are proposed for the Del Rey Series houses. The California Mediterranean architecture is consistent with that seen throughout the area, utilizing similarly -pitched gable, clipped gable and hip roof lines with tile roofs, and stucco walls and arches combined with multi -pane window features. The houses incorporate porticos with gabled hip style roofs. Units in the surrounding area have either hip style, gable or a combination of the two roof treatments, and incorporate similar architectural details as the proposed unit. Garage doors are metal roll -ups, and the colors and materials reflect lighter earth tones suitable to the desert environment. A material sample board will be available at the meeting. A model complex of two houses is proposed at the southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street with the front of the houses facing Kristen Court. Off -site parking for seven cars is provided with driveway access on Adams Street. The proposed houses will have normal setbacks from the property lines that comply with the RL District requirements. The landscape architect has chosen lawn as the unifying theme for the houses with trees, shrubs and annual color. Eight types of trees are listed on the legend (e.g., 24-inch Box). A typical landscape plan for the production houses has been prepared. A copy of the plan is attached. Four houses are shown having a minimum of two trees in the front yard with other trees placed on street side yards (i.e., 24" Boxes). A variety of shrubs are also proposed, with the typical size of five gallon and the number of shrubs per house frontage being no less than ten. The plant palette is consistent with the model complex planting schedule. ANALYSIS: The applicant's plans comply with the RL Zoning Code provisions for the following reasons: 1. The minimum size house allowed is 1,400 square feet. The developer proposes houses that exceed this requirement. 2. Varied front building elevations are provided. This feature of the plan will contribute to a preferred streetscape scene by providing interest to the buyers and visitors of the City. 3. Each house plan provides a minimum two- or three -car garage. Optional bonus areas that, when converted, add a fourth bedroom to the house shall not be allowed unless a three car -garage is provided. The Plan 2X house shall not be built because it requires a three -car garage. STRPSDP611-16/CONDSDP611-16 Page 3 of 5 4. This project is not subject to a compatibility review because no units have been built in the Tract. However, since this developer has built the surrounding houses, these new houses will be compatible with surrounding houses built in Tracts 26188, 25363 and 23935. 5. The model complex location is appropriate because it is located away from existing houses in surrounding Tracts. Off-street parking is proposed to discourage parking on Adams Street. 6. Perimeter screen walls for each house shall be architecturally compatible with the house as required by Chapter 9.60 of the Zoning Code. Houses in the immediate area that were built by Century Homes have tan precision masonry walls with tubular metal gates. Exposed precision masonry block walls are not allowed unless painted or stuccoed to match the architecture of the house based on recent changes to the Zoning Code. 7. The side and rear elevations of the Montecito houses do not have stucco surrounds around the windows as required by the Planning Commission. Staff recommends that this treatment be incorporated into all building elevations in order to upgrade the architectural quality and supplement the varied streetscape views. 8. Exterior materials are stucco with earth (Desert) tone colors. Dark colors are used for accents. Two tone, concrete roof tiles are used to accent the building colors selected by the developer to match existing Century houses. 9. The facade windows for the houses are rectangular (i.e., dual -pane with internal metal grids) with stucco surrounds. These treatments are consistent with existing houses in surrounding developments. 10. The developer's landscaping plan is consistent in overall design with the existing houses in surrounding Tracts. The preliminary landscape plan is substantially consistent with RL requirements in terms of materials and quantities. 11. Rear yard setbacks for these houses shall be 20-feet instead of 10-feet based on the new adopted Zoning Code requirements. The developer shall insure that all houses comply with this standard during plan check review. 12. Pursuant to Condition 55 of Tract Map 27899, only one story houses (20' high or less) shall be built within 150-feet of Miles Avenue. Additionally, Chapters 9.50 and 9.60 of the Zoning Code requires one story houses (22' or less in height) to be built along the Tract boundary if abutting an existing one story home built in Tracts 26188 and 25363. Condition #13 is recommended to insure that all houses built in this Tract meet these standards. STRPSDP611-16/CONDSDP611-16 Page 4 of 5 CONCLUSION: The applicants' development request conforms to the provisions outlined in the City's Zoning Code if conditions are met. RECOMMENDATION: By Minute Motion, approve Site Development Permit 97-611, subject to the Conditions as attached and set forth therein. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Large Plans - Planning Commission Only Prepared by: y� r Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planning Manager STRPSDP611-16/CONDSDP611-16 Page 5 of 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-611 CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES JULY 8, 1997 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL GENERAL All revisions required by these conditions shall be incorporated at plan check, and shall be verified by the Community Development Department prior to building permit issuance or final occupancy release, as appropriate. 2. All outstanding requirements of Tract Map 27899 and the RL Zone District shall be met during building permit plan check approval. SITE DEVELOPMENT 3. Perimeter walls shall be constructed for each house prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The new walls shall be constructed using six-inch wide masonry block that can be stuccoed (or painted) to match the design texture of the house. The wall shall be topped with eight -inch wide block cap to match the existing walls in Tract 26188. Pedestrian gates leading into the side and back yards shall be wrought iron or tubular metal and shall be constructed in accordance with Section 9.60.030 of the Zoning Code. The perimeter wall for the Tract shall be constructed to match the wall built for Tract 26188 unless a deviation is permitted by the Planning Commission. 4. The final landscape/irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review for production housing units. The plans will require Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner approval before they will be considered final, and shall include the following: A. Front yard landscaping shall include lawn and a minimum of ten shrubs (i.e., 5-gallon or larger) and two trees for interior lots and five trees for corner lots. Trunk diameter for 15-gallon and 24" box trees is 1" to 1.75" as measured three -feet up from grade once installed. The developer and subsequent property owner shall continuously maintain all landscaping in a healthy and viable condition. B. All provisions of Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscaping and Irrigation) shall be met. C. All lawn areas shall be either Hybrid Bermuda (Summer) or Hybrid Bermuda/Rye (Winter) depending upon the season when it is installed. All trees shall be double staked to prevent wind damage. All shrubs and trees shall be watered with bubblers or emitters. Landscape and irrigation improvements shall be installed and verified prior to release of any final occupancy for the house. D. The off -site parkway landscaping and irrigation plans shall require review and approval by the Community Development and Public Works Department, and shall be consistent in design with the existing landscaping installed for Tract 26188. Approval by the Coachella Valley Water District and Agricultural Commissioner's Office is required prior to submission of plans to the City. 5. Ground mounted equipment (air-conditioning condensers, etc.) shall be located in side and rear yard areas behind screen walls or landscaping. All equipment shall maintain minimum setback distances as specified in the Zoning Code. 6. Location and design of any patio covers/decking, and/or pool/spa, shall be in accordance with the provisions of Zoning Code Section 9.60.040 and 9.60.070, respectively. 7. The concrete driveways for each house shall include expansion joints and a broom finish (or better) texture and be a minimum width of the required garage door opening. 8. Setbacks for these houses (RL District) shall be: Single Story Homes Two Story Homes A. Front - 20' 20' B. Side - 5' (interior) Varies* C. Side -10' (exterior) 10, D. Rear - 20' 20' * Note: Setback distance based on building height. ARCHITECTURE 9. Colors used in the construction of the house shall be of light earth tones, consistent with those of the surrounding area units. Samples of colors and materials to be used shall be submitted for review during the plan check process and shall be approved prior to permit issuance. C ONDSDP611-16/STRPPC SDP611-16 10. Roll -up, sectional metal garage doors shall be installed for all homes. 11. Plaster surrounds shall be added to all windows on the building elevations for all houses unless confined by architectural features or off -sets, subject to approval of the Community Development Department. MISCELLANEOUS 12. All four bedroom houses (or three bedroom plus den, etc.) shall have three car garages as required by Chapter 9.150 of the Municipal Code. Each required single car garage space shall measure 10-feet wide by 20-feet long (inside dimension) and exclude mechanical equipment. Plan 2X (Del Rey Series) shall not be built because it does not have adequate on -site garage parking. 13. One story houses (20' in height or less) shall be built within 150-feet of Miles Avenue. One story houses (22' in height or less) shall be built adjacent to existing one story homes in Tracts 26188 and 25363 if the existing house is within 50-feet of the common property line as required by Chapters 9.50 and 9.60 of the Zoning Code. 14. Permanent subdivision signing, if desired, for the Tract shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permit for said structure(s) pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 9.160 (Signs) of. the Zoning Ordinance. Any signs installed shall not be internally illuminated. 15. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. 16. A Minor Use Permit shall be required for temporary model complexes including signs/flags per Section 9.60.250 of the Zoning Code. Driveway access on Adams Street for the model complex shall be approved by the Public Works Director. A minimum of 10 on -site parking spaces shall be provided as required by Chapter 9.150 of the Zoning Code. C OND SDP611-16/STRPPC SDP611-16 MIIM AVENUE ��- -_�-- T T- T - x %. '6 d M FA a C/ I I I I I 11 i — 1I m � N � , .-� � -�1.—. -1 L J ►� M r �(ASM _ iI -Kristen ou -� .- _ ^_ -_ - I I D. w _ O I _ _ 0 II -11I T` Tract 26188 4—'1 � Ir ►I- II o � � � I � ►: ;=II IL• — —DIANE DRIVFr I II • I :� , ii, al .1 ul wl �, a 11'Ir-w — I I I Tract 27899 - 41 1- II N¢ II — w _ (� 1 _LJ cotTR�- .- - - _ = I _ a WINDY K� r 7 T r I II u o I kn lylll � ---�-- —--�II1�� -�- -�-�- 1 jF --I -i -�. ,L_ M III a a, `II a\11=Ia121FIIjII °s N III % COURT-/\.—___ _ --_— F. _T I I- j r 7 T T /w « �. �: � i & I 11 — Tract 25363 R•rs r, I _ ► f �— — — I - — —cToiuA DRI�i• -�- _— _— - _ _ - -— r l f T_ 7--T i��T u Tic— F I•IuIwI I �INi 1•Iwlwl� �F r 1� L I II� h L— I DESERT s BRM _ _ _ _ _ _ — -1— I- 1I I '' � rNa iw i u a a I w I `� ( • 1 I 1 I z W O 10 CD I I I I I— L_ I _1 _ _1 -L -I_ _1_ J) I Z I I I ASHLEY SAGE — — — —_ � _ _ — — / � z I. i III Co� o I—(N � T r'T� �T� 1 I� I / : � I ► I I L—L—L—L—W — I� 04 STAFF REPORT PH #C PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 8, 1997 CASE NO: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-337, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28525, SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-034, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-603, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 97-002 APPLICANT: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO. REQUEST: 1. RECOMMEND CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT; AND 2. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP CREATING A 10 LOT SUBDIVISION; AND 3. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF "THE CENTRE AT LA QUINTA" SPECIFIC PLAN CREATING DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR A MULTI -PHASED MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL COMPLEX; AND 4. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING AUTOMOBILE SALES AND SERVICES; 5. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT INCLUDING THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS, SITE, LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING PLANS FOR FIVE AUTO DEALERSHIPS; AND 6. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (CR), MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (M/RC) SURROUNDING ZONING/ LAND USES: NORTH: VACANT WITH A REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION ACROSS HIGHWAY 111 SOUTH: VACANT WITH A REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION EAST: SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE WITH SMALL DATE GROVE WITH A REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION WEST: VACANT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND HIGHWAY 111 WITH A ZONING DESIGNATION OF HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THE REMAINDER IS LAKE LA QUINTA RESIDENCES WITH A ZONING DESIGNATION OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL. DETERMINATION: A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 97011055) WAS PREPARED UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-337. THE DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PREPARED AND CIRCULATED, PURSUANT TO "THE RULES TO IMPLEMENT THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970" (AS AMENDED; RESOLUTION 83-68 ADOPTED BY THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL). STAFF RECOMMENDS CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR IN THAT IT CONSIDERS ALL POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED BUT CAN BE REASONABLY MITIGATED. ALSO, THE DOCUMENT RECOGNIZES THE IMPACTS THAT CAN NOT BE MITIGATED HOWEVER, THE BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT OUTWEIGH THE UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. BACKGROUND Tentative Parcel Map The applicant is proposing a 10 lot Tentative Parcel Map (Attachments 1 & 2) consisting of the following lot sizes: Lot 1: 4.03 acres Lot 2: 3.10 acres Lot 3: 4.04 acres Lot 4: 4.27 acres Lot 5: 5.02 acres Lot 6: 3.07 acres Lot 7: 4.21 acres Lot 8: 3.93 acres Lot 9: 4.21 acres Lot 10: 37.74 acres A Coachella Valley Water District Well site is proposed at the southern most corner of the property adjacent to Adams Street. Three lettered lots are proposed, A, B and C. Lots A and B will be for the Highway 111 50 foot landscape parkway. Lot C is for the 20 foot landscape parkway along Adams Street. The proposed streets will be public, with access off Adams Street onto Auto Center Drive and access off Highway 111 onto La Quinta Centre Drive. A loop road, Auto Centre Way, is proposed around Parcels 4 and 9. Specific Plan The Specific Plan will set forth the detailed development principles, guidelines, and programs to facilitate the development of this 87 acre, three phase mixed commercial complex. An auto sales/services mall containing up to 275,000 square feet is proposed on the western half of the site and the mixed commercial complex is proposed for up to 400,000 square feet on the eastern portion of the site. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) will be .18. The General Plan specifies a maximum FAR of .35 for M/RC uses. Phase I includes five automobile dealerships. All on -site streets, La Quinta Centre Drive, La Quinta Centre Way and Auto Centre Way, perimeter walls and the mass grading of the west half of the property will be completed in this phase. Off site improvements, under Phase I, include the curb/gutter, landscaped median and parkway, and infrastructure improvements along the entire frontage of Adams Street. Highway 111 improvements include the curb/gutter and parkway landscaping along the west portion of the highway. Under Phase II, consisting of the remainder of the auto dealership (of which two can be auto service uses) and/or Phase III, consisting of offices, restaurant, and big box retail, will initiate the remainder of the public improvements on Highway 111 including the construction of the full landscape median. Proposed development standards unique to automobile dealerships are as follows: 1. Storage areas for vehicles will not have striping, curbs, shading and access; 2. Vehicles storage and display may be accommodated on building roofs; 3. Off loading of vehicles will occur in the right of way cross section on the internal streets; 4. Vehicle displays may be proposed in the Highway 111 landscape setback with Planning Commission approval; 5. Public address systems will be prohibited; 6. The layout of individual dealerships shall orient the service department openings of the perimeter sites away from residences to the south and west; 7. Regularly scheduled special events shall be limited to no more than 40 total days per year. Laser lighting is allowed, searchlights will not be allowed. The event shall be over by 10:00 PM. Approval of a Temporary Use Permit is required for each event; 8. Tree wells are not proposed in the parking areas. Monument Signs: Highway 111. Each of the dealership signs will not exceed 5 feet in height and the sign face width will be 10 feet for a total of 50 square feet. The monument base consists of natural boulders and/or artificial rock and the jagged shaped sign face will be concrete. Lighting details are not specified. Two overall center identification signs are proposed, one at the southeast intersection of Adams Street and Highway 111 and the second at the southwest intersection of proposed La Quinta Centre Drive and Highway 111. The height of these two signs will be 12 feet and the width of the sign face will be 9 feet six inches for a total of 114 square feet. Adams Street and Auto Centre Drive. A combined auto/regional monument sign is proposed. The sign will not exceed 8 feet in height and six feet in width for a total of 48 square feet. The sign is composed of a natural boulders/or artificial rock base and jagged shaped concrete face. Interior Streets. Each of the dealers will have a 40 square foot monument sign. The height and width is not specified. The type of illumination is also not specified. Building Mounted Signs: Automobile dealerships. One individually mounted channel letter sign is proposed for the facade of each dealership. The letter height is 24 inches and the length is not specified. Monument signs for the Mixed Regional Commercial Center: Two center signs are proposed, one east of the main entry on Highway 111 and a second sign near the east access point. Major tenants (over 50,000 square may be identified on the sign). The sign size is not specified. Site Development Plan Phase I includes five auto dealerships located at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street. Three are adjacent to Highway 111, with the building facade facing the interior street, Auto Centre Drive. The remaining two are located on the south side of Auto Center Drive. All dealerships have parking designated for customers, employees, service, vehicle display and vehicle storage. Each of the five, one story structures propose similar building materials consisting of tiled roof show rooms, stucco and split face block walls and clear glass windows with aluminum frames. Unique design features and detailing of individual parcels are as follows: Parcel 1: The building is setback approximately 140 feet from Highway 111 and is diagonal to the 6 foot high split face block perimeter wall at the southeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street. The 33 foot high showroom will have a hipped tile roof facing Auto Centre Drive. A massive stucco fascia canopy supported by stucco columns will surround the showroom. The remainder of the building will have parapet stucco walls. These walls will have a molded cornice accented with fluted a block band. Parcel 2: The building is setback approximately 70 feet from the six foot high split face block perimeter wall along Highway 111. The 24 foot high showroom with covered outdoor display will have a hipped tile roof with flanking hipped tile roof canopies. The arched canopies will be supported by stucco columns. All glass windows and doors will have stucco pop out surrounds. The rear elevation shows a tiled roof over the lube storage area. Parcel 3: The building is setback approximately 100 feet from the six foot high split face block perimeter wall along Highway 111. The 32 foot high showroom with covered outdoor display, supported by stucco columns, will have a hipped tile roof with a 6 foot wide stucco fascia. A canopy with a 4 foot wide stucco fascia wraps around the east and west elevations and is also supported by stucco columns. The walls consist of split face block highlighted with a stucco band with tile insets along the upper portion of the wall. Parcel 4: The showroom will have two 28 foot high tiled hipped roofs that extend out to cover the outdoor displays. This area is supported by fluted columns. The roof will have a 5 foot wide stucco fascia. The walls are proposed to consist of split face block. Parcel 5: The building will be setback approximately 180 feet from the 6 foot high split face block wall along Adams Street. The 28 foot high showroom will have a central tower element with a hipped tile' roof. This element will be flanked with stucco fascia canopies supported by buttress shaped stucco columns. Split face block parapet walls are proposed. Automobile parking is proposed on the roof, the parapet wall surrounding the parking will be 4 feet in height. Lighting Plan: The typical light pole standard will not exceed 24 feet in height. A shoebox fixture is proposed, up to four are proposed on each pole standard. The fixture will be mounted perfectly horizontal with no tilt to the mounting. The poles will be spaced approximately 40 feet on center along the front line display area. The secondary parking areas will have poles spaced approximately 60 feet on center and the storage area 80 -100 feet on center. A thousand watt metal halide light source is proposed. Lighting intensity will depend on whether it is within the storage area or the display area. All lighting intensity will be lowered to a security level after 10 PM. Landscaping and Wall Plans: A 6 foot high split face block wall with a cap is proposed along Highway 111 and Adams Street. The wall along Highway 111 will be recessed 5 feet for a length of 100 feet every 500 feet. Pilasters are proposed at regular intervals. The 6 foot high split face block wall along Adams Street will be straight without pilasters. Both street frontages will have meandering sidewalks. The proposed Highway 111 landscaping plant material and design is compatible with the Highway 111 Landscape Design Guidelines as recommended by the City Council. The landscape setback will be a maximum of 62 feet in width. The 20 foot wide landscape frontage along Adams Street will be similar in design and plant materials. Tree sizes have not been specified and shrubs will be 5 gallons in size. The conceptual landscaping plan within the interior of the project will consist of various plant materials outlined in the Specific Plan. The vehicle storage areas will not have landscape planters. Landscape planters are proposed at the end of parking rows within the front of each automobile dealership. Specific tree species are not called out with the exception of the Date and California Fan Palms. Proposed concrete mow strips separate the turf and shrub areas along the interior street frontages. Development Agreement The Development Agreement process is provided by the La Quinta Municipal Zoning Code and State statues. A Development Agreement is a binding agreement between both parties for the purpose of establishing certainty that the development will progress in a timely manner. Both parties desire to enter this Development Agreement to construct and dedicate certain public facilities, and infrastructure improvements, all in the promotion of the health, safety, and general welfare of the City. The developer/owner wishes to develop the project and public improvements in exchange from assurances from the City that the developer will be permitted to implement the development in accordance with the terms and conditions as set forth in the Agreement. The City wishes to enter into the Agreement to assure that the public improvements being constructed for the property, as conditioned, will be achieved along Highway 111, and Adams Street. The Development Agreement complies with the State statues and zoning regulation for the formation of a Development Agreement. The Development Agreement further provides for development requirements that are in excess of City standards, such as the development density, intensity and potential adverse environmental impacts are significantly more restrictive than those currently permitted under the applicable General Plan and Zoning Code provision. In addition, entire landscape medians will be constructed on both Highway 111 and Adams Street. The Development Agreement requires annual reviews which also is in compliance with State and local requirements. The City Attorney has in conjunction with Stamko Development Co. prepared the Development Agreement. ISSUES: Environmental Impact Report Within the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program under Aesthetics (MMP-35), Mitigation Measure AES1 recommends the following "Limit building heights in the northeastern quadrant of the project site, i.e., the northern half of Planning Area 2, to one story or 25 feet. Spacing between buildings shall be minimum of 150 feet. Alternatively, future site development applications in that area may submit a Dine -of -sight or equivalent visual impact analysis that proves that the placement, height and massing of proposed building so as not result in a significant obstruction of views of the Santa Rosa Mountains." After additional review of this mitigation measure, staff recommends that design alternatives that achieve the goal of maintaining broad expansive views both above and between the buildings be pursued. Strict interpretation of this mitigation, specifically application of the 150 foot separation, given the 950 feet of frontage, would only allow each of the five buildings to be 60 feet in width. Also, the conceptual site plan shows all the buildings in a straight line, with the building on the right at 50 feet in height and the remaining buildings at 30 feet in height. This building footprint configuration immediately adjacent to Highway 111, as shown in the computer -simulated view of developed conditions, does not provide much visual interest. (Attachment 3) Therefore, staff is working with the EIR consultant in preparing two additional computer - simulated view alternatives 1) Reducing the height of the buildings to 25 feet, while retaining the distance between buildings as proposed by the applicant, between 80-85 feet and 2) Reducing the height of the buildings to 25 feet, and shifting the second and fourth buildings away from Highway 111 a minimum of 50 feet. These computer simulations will be available at the meeting. Staffs recommendation will depend on which alternative best reduces the view obstructing impact to the mountains. Specific Plan Because of a concern for excessive and unattractive advertising, staff is recommending that the dealership be prohibited from displaying cars on the roof as specified in the Specific Plan, Section 2.50.4.1 Site Plan (page 34). Also, because of the nine monument signs proposed on Highway 111 one for each of the dealerships, staff is concerned above the potential for sign clutter if the three dealerships with building elevations facing Highway 111 propose building mounted signs. Therefore staff is recommending that building mounted signs be prohibited facing Highway 111. Clarification is necessary regarding the number of building mounted signs for the individual car dealerships. On Page 44 of the Specific Plan under 2.80.1.1 it specifies that only one dealership identification is allowed. However, Exhibit 19 Building Signage shows two building mounted signs. Staff is recommending this be corrected to be consistent with the narrative. Also, revision is necessary in that the ground mounted signs will not identify the dealership but will identify the product sold, i.e. Subaru, Volvo etc. Staff is concerned with Parcel 5's roof parking lot and the potential for visibility of cars and lighting from the adjacent residential subdivision, Lake La Quinta, across from Adams Street. The proposed parapet wall surrounding the parking area is 4 feet high. Automobiles are generally 4 and Y2 feet tall and trucks are 5 and Y2 feet tall. Therefore, staff is recommending raising the parapet height to 5 and Y2 feet to assure the vehicles will be adequately shielded. Secondly, staff is recommending that any lighting will be mounted on the interior of the parapet wall and no lighting will be allowed that extends above the parapet wall. Site Development Permit The tree sizes are not specified for the Highway 111 and Adams Street landscape setbacks as well as the interior landscaping for the individual dealerships. Staff is recommending the tree sizes be a mix of 24 inch box, with a minimum of 2-1/2" to 3" diameter as measured 6" from grade and 36 inch box, with a minimum of 4" diameter as measured 12" from grade. Staff is concerned with the minimal design articulation proposed along the rear elevations of Parcel's 1, 2 and 3, adjacent to Highway 111. Most importantly, Parcel 3 proposes a flat split face block, 150 foot wide building wall with a stucco band and tile insets without any changes to the wall plane. Staff has contacted the project architect regarding the need for additional design treatment consisting of stepped parapet walls, trellises, pilasters etc. He will be presenting at the meeting design alternatives addressing this concern. Public Noticing This case was advertised in the Desert Sun on June 15, 1997. All property owners within the 500 feet of the boundaries of the project were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice. As of this writing no correspondence has been received regarding this project. All appropriate outside agencies have been notified and their responses are included in the Conditions of Approval. RECOMMENDATION By Planning Commission Resolution 97- move to recommend certification of the Environmental Impact Report prepared for Specific Plan 97-029, Conditional Use Permit 97-034,'Tentative Parcel Map 28525, Site Development Permit 97-603, and Development Agreement 97-002. 2. By Planning Commission Resolution 97- move to recommend approval of Tentative Parcel Map 28525, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval. 3. By Planning Commission Resolution 97- move to recommend approval of Specific Plan 97-029, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval. 4. By Planning Commission Resolution 97- move to recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit 97-034, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval. 5. By Planning Commission Resolution 97- move to recommend approval of Site Development Permit 97-603, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval. 6. By Planning Commission Resolution 97- move to recommend approval of Development Agreement 97-002. Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Tentative Parcel Map 28525 3. Computer simulated view of developed conditions Prepared and Submitted by, CHRISTINE DI IORIO, Planning Manager. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029; DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 97-002; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-034; SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-603 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28525, AS BEING ADEQUATE AND COMPLETE; RECOGNIZING THE OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS TO CERTAIN ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; AND RECOGNIZING THE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED, BUT WHICH CAN BE REASONABLY MITIGATED, IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029; DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 97-002; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-034; SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-603 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28525 - STAMKO DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of July, 1997, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of Stamko Development (hereinafter "Stamko") for approval of a Specific Plan, Development Agreement, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Permit and Tentative Parcel Map (hereinafter "the Entitlement Approvals") to allow construction of an 87 acre multi -phased mixed commercial project consisting of an auto sale/service mall and a retail complex and subdivision of the site into ten parcels to allow auto service/sales (hereinafter "the Project"). The Project site is more particularly described as: SOUTH SIDE OF STATE HIGHWAY 111, BETWEEN ADAMS STREET AND DUNE PALMS ROAD (A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST AND NORTHWEST QUARTER '/4 OF SECTION 29, T5S, R7E); and WHEREAS, Stamko has proposed a Specific Plan on the 87 acres herein described, consisting of a multi -phased mixed commercial project containing an auto sale/service mall and a retail complex, and related uses; and RESOPC-EASTAM Planning Commission Resolution 97-, WHEREAS, an EIR has been prepared and circulated, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (hereinafter "CEQA"), as amended (Public Resources Code §21000, et M.); and WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California and the City of La Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, that the City shall not approve a project unless there is no feasible way to lessen or avoid significant adverse environmental impacts, which means that all adverse environmental impacts have been avoided to the extent feasible or substantially lessened, and any remaining unavoidable significant adverse environmental impacts are acceptable based upon the City's findings and determinations consistent with CEQA; and WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California, and the City of La Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, that the City shall balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable adverse environmental impacts prior to project approval; which means that if the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, the adverse environmental impacts may be considered legally acceptable by the City of La Quinta; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta has read and considered all documentation comprising the EIR, and has found that the EIR considers all potential significant adverse environmental impacts which may be caused by the proposed project, is complete and adequate, fully complies with all requirements of CEQA and reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered certain overriding considerations to any potentially significant adverse environmental impacts which cannot be reasonably mitigated to insignificance and has reviewed and considered the CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts prepared in connection with its consideration of the Project and the Entitlement Approvals; and WHEREAS, prior to action on the Project and the Entitlement Approvals, the Planning Commission considered all significant adverse environmental impacts, mitigation measures and proposed project alternatives identified in the EIR, and has found that all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts which may be caused by the Project and implementation of the Entitlement Approvals have been lessened or avoided to the extent feasible and the Planning Commission has determined that the proposed alternatives to the Project do not: 1) meet the City's and/or Stamko's objectives for the Project Site; and/or 2) are not feasible; and/or 3) are not environmentally superior; and RESOPC'-EASTAM Planning Commission Resolution 97- WHEREAS, CEQA Guideline Section 15093(b) recognizes that the La Quinta Planning Commission may proceed to recommend approval of the Project and the Entitlement Approvals, despite the fact that certain potentially significant adverse environmental impacts are identified in the EIR which are not mitigated to a level of insignificance, where the City has stated in writing the reasons to support its action based upon the EIR and other information in the public record; and WHEREAS, CEQA provides that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed and which identifies one or more significant adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project unless the public agency makes written factual findings for each of the potentially significant adverse environmental impacts identified in the EIR. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, does hereby certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (hereinafter "FEIR") for Specific Plan 97-029, Tentative Parcel Map 28525; Conditional Use Permit 97-034; Site Development Permit 97-603 and Development Agreement 97-002, as adequate and complete and in compliance with the requirements of CEQA. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, in addition to the findings made in the body of the FEIR, finds that the Statement of Overriding Considerations as shown on attached Exhibit A, entitled "Statement of Overriding Considerations", is necessary, and is adopted and incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta, California, adopts the CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts as shown on attached Exhibit B, entitled "CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts", which is incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth. APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8th day of July, 1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RESOPC:-EASTAM Planning Commission Resolution 97- JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC:-EASTAM EXHIBIT "A" STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The Final Environmental Impact Report for the Centre at La Quinta's Specific Plan 97-029; Tentative Parcel Map 28525; Conditional Use Permit 97-034; Site Development Permit 97-603; and Development Agreement 97-002, which allow for construction of an 87 acre multi -phased mixed commercial project consisting of an auto sale/service mall and a retail complex (hereinafter "the Project"), recognizes that certain specified adverse environmental impacts may be caused by the approval and construction of the Project, which may not be mitigated to a level of insignificance by the application of reasonable mitigation measures. Despite the recognition and finding in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Project that such unavoidable adverse environmental impacts may be caused by the Project, nevertheless, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta expressly finds and declares, after a thorough review and consideration of such potentially adverse environmental impacts, that the benefits of the Project outweigh the uinavoidable adverse environmental impacts, and are therefore deemed to be acceptable by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta bases its determination on the following grounds: Implementation of the Project is consistent with the City's goals and objectives for development of the Project Site, as set forth in the City's General Plan Land Use Element; and 2. Implementation of the Project will enhance the City's economic base from revenues derived from increased sales taxes, business licenses and other fees, taxes and exactions, which will flow from the development of the Project; and 3. Implementation of the Project will result in the elimination of certain negative aesthetic impacts associated with the currently vacant property, including but not limited to the development of landscaped set -backs and medians along that part of Highway 111 that abuts the Project Site; and 4. The potential adverse environmental impacts identified with the construction and operation of the Project are generally associated with normal growth, progress and prosperity in a developing community; and RESOPC:-EASTAM 5. The Project will be instrumental in causing new area -wide public infrastructure improvements to be constructed, which will benefit both existing development and other future development, including but not limited to street improvements and public utility improvements; and 6. The Specific Plan Project implementation will ultimately result in the creation of new jobs for construction and for the operation of new businesses associated with the Project; and 7. The proposed Project is significantly more restrictive in its development density, intensity and potential adverse environmental impacts, than the density, intensity and level of adverse environmental impacts of development which is currently permitted under the applicable General Plan and Zoning Code provisions. Consequently, the Planning Commission finds that the Project is a preferred and appropriate balance between environmental concerns and the need for economic development within the City of La Quinta. RESOPC-EASTAM EXHIBIT "B" CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURE The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) promulgated pursuant thereto provide: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been completed and which identifies one or more significant effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more of the following written findings for each of the significant effects, accompanied by a Statement of Facts supporting each finding. The possible findings are: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR (Section 150910 of the CEQA Guidelines. Because the approval and implementation of Specific Plan 97-029; Development Agreement 97-002; Conditional Use Permit 97-034; Site Development Permit 97-603; and Tentative Parcel Map 28525 constitute a project under CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council of the City of La Quinta has required an Environmental Impact Report be prepared. This Environmental Impact Report has identified certain significant effects which may occur as a result of the project, or on a cumulative basis in conjunction with this project and other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Further, the Planning Commission recommends approval of this project and, after determining that the Environmental Impact Report is complete and has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the findings set forth herein are made as follows: IMPACTS EVALUATED IN THE DRAFT EIR On the basis of a detailed Initial Study, the City concluded that further evaluation of the project's potential environmental impacts was needed, in the form of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The impact areas to be addressed in the DEIR included: 6 Secondary Land Use Effects 6 Geotechnical Considerations 6 Hydrology/Water Quality 6 Biological Resources 6 Transportation/Circulation o Air Quality o Noise o Water Distribution and Storage o Solid Waste Disposal o Public Services (Fire Protection, Sheriff Protection, Emergency Medical Response) b Aesthetics o Cultural Resources The analysis in the DEIR resulted in the following findings concerning the project's environmental impacts and the feasibility/desirability of alternatives to the project: Direct Project Impacts A. Impacts Determined to be Less than Significant 1. Secondary Land Use Effects: No significant secondary land use impacts are anticipated because the affected sites in Indio could be recycled or redeveloped with other economically productive uses. 2. Geotechnical Considerations: No significant geotechnical import are anticipated because no ground rupture is likely to occur during an earthquake; soils have low liquefaction potential; no expansive soils occur on -site; and ground lurching is not expected. 3. Hydrology/Water Quality: No flooding impacts on- or off -site are anticipated, because the proposed runoff management plan would contain developed conditions storm flows (up to and including flows from a 100-year storm) within the project site. Because there will be no offsite run-off, there will be no significant water quality impacts offsite. There will be no significant water quality impacts onsite because the proposed run-off management plan incorporates landscape and mechanical retention facilities that will filter any water run-off. 4. Air Quality: No significant long term carbon monoxide air quality impacts are anticipated because such long term carbon monoxide concentrations would be lower than the significance thresholds established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). No significant objectionable odors are anticipated because of the following changes which have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which minimize the potential for objectionable odors to be generated that might affect sensitive receptors on surrounding properties: a. The developer shall implement all rules and regulations adopted by the Governing Board of the SCAQMD which are applicable to the development of the project (such as Rule 402, Nuisance, and Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings) and which are in effect at the time of development. 5. Noise: No significant construction noise impacts are anticipated because of the distance to nearby sensitive receptors and because of mandatory compliance with the City's standard restrictions regarding days and hours when construction activity is permitted. Nevertheless, contractors will be required to implement noise reduction measures to reduce the amount of noise that could affect the Lake La Quinta neighborhood, as follows: a. Between May 1 and September 30, all construction activity on the project site shall only occur between the hours of 6:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M. Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. on Saturday, and shall be prohibited on Sundays and public holidays. Between October 1 and April 30, all construction activity on the project site shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 5:30 P.M. Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. on Saturday, and shall be prohibited on Sundays and public holidays. b. The Applicant will be required to implement additional noise reduction measures to reduce the amount of noise that could affect the Lake La Quinta neighborhood, such as changing the location of stationary construction equipment, shutting off idling equipment, equipping heavy equipment with noise muffling devices, notifying nearby residents in advance of construction work, and installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources such as portable generators. Site operation activities will increase local noise levels, but such levels will not exceed the City's noise limits. Noise from proposed auto repair facilities will be contained within enclosed structures, with side entrances oriented away from the Lake La Quinta neighborhood. A six-foot high, masonry wall is proposed along the interior edge of the 20 foot -wide landscape setback along Adams Street, which will also provide a noise buffer between the project site and the Lake La Quinta neighborhood. Traffic noise will increase as a result of the, project's added traffic on the roadway system, but the increase would not result in noise levels that exceed City noise limits. 6. Water Distribution and Storage: Water supply impacts will not be significant because project water demand will not exceed available water supplies; and, no significant extension of distribution facilities or creation of new water storage facilities will be needed to serve the project. No wasteful water practices have been identified for the proposed project. However, to ensure that future development at the project site does not include activities which consume excessive amounts of water, or which involve wasteful water consumption practices, the following changes have been required in, or incorporated into, the project: a. To ensure that future land uses do not include activities which unnecessarily waste water or which consume exceptional amounts of water, the City will direct the Applicant's contractors to consult with the CVWD to develop appropriate water conservation measures for both landscaping/irrigation requirements and plumbing controls. The City will require that the Applicant implement the water conservation measures that are developed from the consultations with CVWD, and will require compliance with the City's existing water conservation ordinance to the extent applicable. 7. Public Services: Project construction and operation will increase demand for fire protection, sheriff protection and emergency medical services, to a minor, but less than significant level, and would not require expansions to these services in order to address project impacts. No significant cumulative impacts to public services are anticipated as a result of this project. Although no significant project impacts are anticipated, the following changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will reduce any potential impacts on the demand for such services. These mitigation measures are as follows: a. All on -site water distribution facilities shall be constructed in accordance with Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County Fire Department standards. b. Fire hydrants shall be provided at the site to the satisfaction of the Riverside County Fire Department. C. Adequate access and turning radii for fire trucks and other fire fighting apparatus shall be incorporated into project design plans to the satisfaction of the Riverside County Fire Department. d. All on -site structures shall be built to conform with criteria contained within the Uniform Fire Code and in accordance with Riverside County Fire Department and City of La Quinta standards. e. During the construction and operations phases, activities involving the use and storage of highly flammable substances (i.e., fuels and solvents) shall be conducted in accordance with Riverside County Fire Department standards. f. Areas such as streets, security walls and parking areas shall be well lit to dissuade would-be criminals from targeting these area for illegal activities. g. All doors shall have an industrial quality key and latch system. All exterior doors shall have deadbolt locks. h. All delivery doors shall be equipped with a peephole for delivery identification purposes. i. To avoid creating convenient hiding places for would-be criminals, shrubbery found in the site interior shall be trimmed to a height of three feet or less. In addition, product displays and vegetation shall be kept clear of exterior windows to avoid blocking the visibility into store interiors by passing patrol cars. j . Parking and unloading areas shall be designed to avoid creating traffic problems. k. To reduce the response times of emergency vehicles, addresses shall be at least eight inches tall and shall contrast with the background. Closed circuit, remote video surveillance systems, shall be installed to monitor the security of auto dealership sites. in. Any future proposal to develop a personal goods or vehicle storage business shall include a closed circuit, remote video surveillance system to monitor site security. n. , Any future proposal to develop a business that would be open for 24 hours shall include the following security measures: (1). A closed circuit video monitoring system shall be installed. Security cameras shall be located above cash register areas, entrances and exits and walk-in coolers. Signs shall be posted to advise patrons that the premises are being monitored by 24-hour surveillance cameras. (2) Operation during nighttime hours shall be staffed with more than one employee. (3) Employees shall conduct frequent money drops into the building's safe. 9. Aesthetics: No significant aesthetic impacts are anticipated because the proposed development intensity, and the proposed setbacks and landscaping along Highway I I I and Adams Street, are all consistent with City policies and development standards. Potentially significant outdoor lighting and glare impacts will be avoided through mandatory compliance with the provisions of La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.100.150, and through proposed lighting restrictions contained in the proposed Specific Plan No. 97-002, Section 2.50.3.7. 10. Cultural Resources: No significant cultural resources impacts are anticipated because no significant cultural resources have been found on -site and the potential to damage undiscovered resources during grading and site development is considered low. Nevertheless, as an added precaution, the project will be required to implement the following mitigation measure: a. A qualified, professional archaeologist will conduct intensive archaeological monitoring of the entire first grading phase. Based on the results of this monitoring program, recommendations for the extent of subsequent grading/site preparation phases will be reassessed. Less intensive monitoring will be conducted throughout the project area during subsequent grading activity. The archaeological monitor will have the authority to halt any activities causing adverse impacts to potentially significant buried archaeological resources. Once identified, the archaeological consultant will evaluate the find(s) in accordance with criteria presented in Appendix K of CEQA. It is also recommended, but not required, that the archaeological monitoring program involve Native American input, either as observers or consultants. The presence of a Native American monitor would be at the discretion of the local Native American representative(s) and coordinated with the monitoring schedule. B. Impacts That Could be Significant, But are Mitigable to Less Than Significant 1. Geotechnical Considerations: The project site is located within an seismically active area and could be subject to significant groundshaking during an earthquake along the San Andreas Fault or other regional faults. Significant groundshaking could damage structures and thereby expose persons to dangers associated with collapsing structures, falling materials, etc. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: a. Structural design will take into account the anticipated ground shaking characteristics in the design of the proposed buildings for earthquake loading. Project plans and specifications shall satisfy the seismic design parameters set forth in the latest addition of the Uniform Building Code, as administered by the City of La Quinta. These criteria are considered minimum guidelines for project structural design. A trace of an inferred fault, considered inactive, occurs near the western edge of the project site, and may contain soils or geological characteristics which could represent unstable conditions that require special design or construction techniques. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: b. The inferred fault trace in the western edge of the project site is not considered active and is not recognized as a major geologic hazard. Pursuant to La Quinta General Plan Policy 8-1.1.1, however, further investigation of this part of the site shall be conducted prior to any grading in that area, to more closely analyze this feature to determine whether it contains any significant geological constraints that would require special design or construction measures. If such constraints are found, appropriate design and construction control measures shall be incorporated into grading, foundation and/or structural plans, as recommended by the geotechnical engineer. On -site soils have significant settlement potential, which, if not mitigated, could result in cracked building foundations and cracks in pavement areas. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: C. Once the location, size and loading conditions for the proposed buildings have been determined, design level soil engineering studies shall be conducted on a lot by lot basis, if necessary. Those studies will include drilled test borings, laboratory testing program and a design level report. The report will provide criteria for design of foundations, slab -on -grade construction, site grading specifications and utility trench backfill recommendations. d. The project soil engineer will review the grading plans and project improvement plans for the projects prior to construction. The review is intended to determine compliance with the intent of the recommendations contained in the soils engineering report. e. Site grading and construction will be observed by the project soil engineer and tested, as necessary, to determine general compliance with the recommendations contained in the soils engineering report. In addition, the soil engineer will observe conditions exposed by the grading and record significant features and/or changes that may be exposed. Various aspects of grading will be covered in a pre -construction conference with representatives of the owner, grading contractor, civil engineer and geotechnical engineer. f. Prior to any grading operations, areas which are to receive select structural fill, foundations, pavement sections, or concrete slabs -on -grade must be cleared of pavements, abandoned utilities and old foundations. The materials to be removed will be observed by a qualified soils engineer when clearing and stripping operations are in progress. g. The bottom of depressions created by the removal of existing structures or pavement should be scarified, and cross scarified at least 8-inches, and recompacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density. The depressions should then be backfilled with approved, compacted select structural fill, as specified by the project soils engineer. Clearing and backfill operations will be conducted under the field observation of the soil engineer. h. ' Select structural fill material may be placed in thin lifts, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to 90 percent of maximum dry density until finished grade has been obtained. Compaction criteria will be based on the laboratory test procedure ASTM D 1557-91. i. The soil engineer will be notified at least 48 hours prior to commencement of any grading operations, so he may coordinate the work in the field with the contractors. j . The support of a proposed structure may be provided by conventional, strip and spread footings bearing firm reworked native soil or select structural fill, but not on a combination of both. The design criteria for foundations, including detailed reinforcing requirements, will be determined by a site specific soil engineering study, and the design engineer performing the structural analysis of the proposed building and supporting foundations. k. Perimeter and interior footings should be founded a minimum 12 to 18 inches into the lowest adjacent, compacted soil pads. Interior footing under concrete slab -on -grade should be founded a minimum of 12 to 15 inches into the compacted soil building pad. Select structural fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density. For the above conditions, the foundations for a proposed structure may be designed for an allowable bearing pressure range of 2000 to 3000 pounds per square foot for dead plus reasonable live loads. These values may be increased by 1/3 to include short term seismic and wind effects. 1. The soils engineer will observe foundation excavations prior to placing form boards or placement of reinforcing steel. The purpose of this is to verify the soil density within the bearing soils. in. Concrete slabs -on -grade associated with high point loads, such as those associated with fork lifts, and those that will be subjected to heavy construction loads, such as those created by a crane lifting concrete panel, should be sufficiently thick and reinforced to accornmodate these loads. n. For concrete slab -on -grade floor construction in warehouse or maintenance areas, where no floor covering will be used (and not subjected to high point loads), a minimum 4 inch layer of 3/4" baserock should be placed and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum dry density. If a moisture vapor barrier is used, the barrier should be overlaid by 2 inches of commercial quality sand. The sand should be lightly moistened prior to placing concrete. o. Exterior concrete slabs -on -grade, such as driveways, should be founded on at least 6" of approved import baserock, or as specified by the City of La Quinta, which ever is more stringent. The use of reinforcing steel in exterior concrete flatwork is recommended and all construction joints should be held together by steel dowels. It is recommended that exterior concrete flatwork soil areas be premoistened before concrete is placed. p. Interior concrete slabs -on -grade should contain reinforcement with the slabs structurally connected to adjacent perimeter foundations. Reinforcing of interior slabs -on -grade will be provided by the structural engineer, based on the proposed usage. q. Concrete slabs should be divided into essentially equi-dimensional segments during construction to help control cracking during the curing period. Reinforcing of the concrete slab -on -grade is recommended and the slab should be structurally connected to the perimeter foundations at all door openings. Construction joints should be adequately doweled. If interior slabs are designed as free floating, an adequate expansion joint of felt should be placed between the concrete slab and foundation. r. Exterior slabs -on -grade, which will experience vehicular traffic, including fork lift traffic, such as driveway aprons and trash bin aprons, should have at least 8 inches of compacted Class II aggregate base rock (R= 78 min.) under the concrete slab; actual thickness is dependent upon the slab thickness and actual traffic loads and volume. The baserock should be compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density. S. Backfill of utilities within road right-of-way will be placed in strict conformance with the requirements of the governing agency (City of La Quinta, CV WD, Caltrans, etc.). t. Utility trench backfill within private property will be placed in strict conformance with the provisions of this report relating to minimum compaction standards. In general, service lines extending inside of the subject property may be backfilled with native soils compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density. Uncontrolled surface drainage that allows ponding to occur on slopes and around structures could weaken slopes and lead to cracked foundations. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: U. Where no exterior pavement section abuts the buildings, soil should be backfilled against the exterior footings and the final grade should result in a positive gradient away from the buildings, in order to provide rapid removal of rain and irrigation water away from the foundations. V. To help minimize increased moisture into fill material under new foundations and pavements, good site drainage is important. Site drainage should be in the form of roof gutters, catch basins and other drainage facilities. Down -spouts from the roof of the buildings should discharge collected rainwater onto splashblocks, adjacent paved areas, or be tied into a water -tight drainage pipe, which will carry the collected water away from the building areas. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to prevent excess irrigation and ponding. Erosion of soils during periods of high winds can result in removal of material intended to be the foundation of structures and deposition of uncompacted and unstable materials that are susceptible to future settlement. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant effect, as follows: W. To control erosion during construction, the soil shall be kept moist by frequent watering. After construction, when frequent watering is no longer feasible, install wind -breaks and plant native grasses and brush shall be installed on areas reserved for future phases of development, to minimize the contact of the wind against the ground. 2. Hydrology and Water Quality: The proposed runoff management plan is intended to contain all site runoff for storm conditions up to and including a 100-year storm. To further ensure that all site runoff is contained, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: a. Final grading and drainage plans for each phase of development shall incorporate retention facilities, and shall prove to the satisfaction of the City of La Quinta that there will be no site runoff for rainstorms up to and including the 100-year storm. b. To ensure the continued effectiveness of the storm drainage and retention facilities, property owner maintenance associations shall be established to regularly clean and maintain landscaping, storm drainage facilities and retention areas, including drywells, which support those properties. 3. Biological Resources: During site grading and construction that occurs during the nesting/breeding season (typically February through July), there is a potential to destroy bird nests that are occupied by native bird species. If this occurs, it would be considered a significant impact. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: a. Common and Special -Status Bird Nests. If project site grading and/or construction will occur during the nesting/breeding season (typically February through July) of native bird species potentially nesting on the site, then the following measure shall be implemented: Prior to construction or site preparation activities, a field survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if active nests of special -status birds (e.g., loggerhead shrike) or common bird species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and/or the California Fish and Game Code, are present in the construction zone or within 50 feet of the construction zone. If active nests are found, a minimum 50-foot (this distance may be greater depending on the bird species and construction activity, as determined by the biologist) fenced buffer shall be established around the nest site. No construction activities shall be permitted within this nest zone until the young birds have fledged, as determined by the project biologist. The proposed grading concept will result in removal of all existing vegetation on -site, and conversion of this presently open land to a built environment. This will result in a loss of potential habitat for one endangered species (Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard) and one special status species (flat -tailed horned lizard), which is considered a significant impact. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: b. Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard and Flat -tailed Horned Lizard. The project applicant shall pay $600 per acre developed to the City of La Quinta as part of the Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard mitigation plan. This mitigation structure has been established by the USFWS and CDFG. The fee is applied when lands within known or historical fringe -toed lizard habitat are developed. The project lies within the fee area. The mitigation fee is used to purchase fringe -toed lizard habitat in special preserves, such as the Coachella Valley Preserve area, for the purpose of maintaining suitable habitat for the fringe -toed lizard. In addition, even though there is only a low potential for the flat -tailed horned lizard to occur on the site due to the disturbed nature of the habitat, the fringe -toed lizard habitat on the site is also suitable for the horned lizard. The payment of the mitigation fee to preserve and enhance fringe -toed lizard habitat, will also benefit the flat -tailed horned lizard. Therefore, the mitigation fee paid for the loss of fringe -toed lizard habitat on the site will 41so mitigate the loss of this same habitat for flat -tailed horned lizard. 4. Transportation and Circulation: Proper site access control and adequate sight distance are needed to ensure safe ingress/egress at the project's main entrances, and to avoid traffic conflicts with through traffic. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: a. The proposed project shall have full access to SR-111 and Adams Street. The project developer(s) shall construct the site -specific circulation recommendations as depicted in Figure 20 of the DEIR. b. Sight distance at each project entrance shall be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans/City of La Quinta sight distance standards at the time of preparation of final grading, landscape and street improvement plans. C. The project developer(s) shall provide a westbound 400 foot left turn pocket on SR- 111 for vehicles desiring to turn left into the project site. d. The project developer(s) shall provide a southbound 300 foot left turn pocket on Adams Street for vehicles desiring to turn left into the project site. Traffic signal warrants are projected to be met at the project entrance on Highway 111, upon opening of the project's first phase, and at the Adams Street entrance, prior to completion of the mixed -use regional commercial center in the third project phase. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: e. The project developer will be required to install a traffic signal at the project entrance/Highway I I I intersection, as part of the Phase 1 project improvements along Highway 111. f. The project developer will be required to install a traffic signal at the Adams St./47th Avenue entrance to the project site, prior to completion of the last phase of the project. 5. Water Distribution and Storage: Although no wasteful water practices or exceptionally high water demand activities are expected to occur as a result of the proposed project, future development proposals for portions of the project site, not currently identified for a specific land use, could involve such activities. Wasteful or high demand water consumption would be considered a significant impact on water distribution and storage. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact., as follows: a. To ensure that future land uses do not include activities which unnecessarily waste water or which consume exceptional amounts of water, the City will direct contractors to consult with the CVWD to develop appropriate water conservation measures for both landscaping/irrigation requirements and plumbing controls. The City will require that the Applicant implement the water conservation measures that are developed from the consultations with CVWD, and will require compliance with the City's existing water conservation ordinance, to the extent applicable. 6. Solid Waste Disposal: Construction -period solid wastes could have a significant impact on local landfill capacity, unless measures are taken to reduce, recycle or reuse such wastes to minimize the amount that must be disposed of at a landfill. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: a. Contractors shall separate recyclable construction waste materials in separate bins, and shall arrange for transport of recyclable materials to facilities which accept the materials. A list of recyclable construction materials and recycling facilities is available, and shall be obtained, from the City of La Quinta. All recyclable materials shall be recycled. b. Builders competing for construction contracts shall be required to include proposals for the use of building products made of recycled materials. Given the City's obligations under AB 939 to substantially reduce the amount of solid wastes that must be disposed of at a sanitary landfill, if solid waste reduction, recycling and/or reuse measures are not incorporated into the project, the project's solid waste impact would be considered significant. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: C. Green waste generated on the project site shall be treated in such a way as to avoid disposal in landfills. This may be accomplished, for example, by composting either on -site or at approved facilities and mulching for use on- and off -site. d. Prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase of the project, a solid waste management program shall be required from the Applicant for that portion of the site, or for larger areas if more efficient, by the City of La Quinta. These programs shall maximize the recycling potential of packaging materials (cardboard), mixed papers, and scrap ferrous materials, and shall include designated areas for trash separation bins which are accessible to waste haulers, and identification of materials that are to be recycled. The following requirements shall be included in the Applicant's proposed plan: (1) Recycling/separation areas shall be located in close proximity to dumpsters for non-recyclables, elevators, loading docks, and primary internal and external access points. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). (2) The locations of recycling/separation areas shall not conflict with any applicable federal, state or local laws relating to fire, building, access, transportation, circulation, or safety. (3) Recycling/separation areas shall be located so that they are convenient for those persons who deposit, collect, and load the recyclable materials. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). • (4) Recycling containers/bins shall be located so that they do not block ,access to each other. (5) Solid waste collection/recycling shall be compatible with nearby structures, secure, protected against adverse environmental conditions, clearly marked, adequate in capacity, number and distribution, and contain a sufficient number of bins, to serve the recycling needs of the development. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). (6) Collection/recycling areas shall be designed to accommodate front -loader packing trucks, including maneuvering room. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance) o Driveways and/or travel aisles shalla be constructed with adequate width and maneuverability space for unobstructed garbage collection vehicle access and clearance. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). (7) Signs shall be posted at all access points of the recycling areas that clearly identify all recycling and solid waste collection and loading areas and the materials accepted therein. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance) A variety of hazardous wastes, both liquid and solid, would be generated in small quantities by the proposed auto dealerships and other commercial uses that could be developed in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan. These wastes must be safely stored while awaiting disposal, and there are no waste disposal facilities within Riverside County currently accepting such wastes. Special provisions, therefore, must be made to properly store and dispose of the project's hazardous wastes, to avoid unlawful and unsafe disposal of such materials. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant impact, as follows: e. Prior to occupancy of each phase of the project, the managers of the auto dealerships and the commercial center shall prepare programs for the proper storage, collection, identification, and disposal of industrial chemical and hazardous material wastes. These programs shall be prepared and implemented to the satisfaction of the Riverside County Waste Resources Management District, the Riverside County Fire Department, and the City of La Quinta. 8. Aesthetics: Placement of large, bulky buildings within the northeastern quadrant of the project site, i.e. the northern portion of the proposed mixed -use regional commercial center area, could result in a substantial, negative alteration of scenic vistas of the Coral Reef and Santa Rosa Mountains, as viewed from Highway 111. This would be considered a significant impact.. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant effect, as follows: a. Limit building heights in the northeastern quadrant of the project site, i.e., the northern half of Planning Area 2, to one story or 25 feet. Spacing between buildings shall be a minimum of 150 feet. Alternatively, future site development applications in that area may submit a line -of -sight or equivalent visual impact analysis that proves that the placement, height and massing of proposed buildings does not result in a significant obstruction of views of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The proposed project includes a solid, masonry screening wall along the Highway 111 and Adams Street frontages that would be aligned in a straight line along the interior edge of the landscape setback along both frontages. This straight-line wall design would conflict with Section 9.150L.3.b. of the La Quinta Municipal Code, which states that screening walls should not be constructed in long, straight stretches, to prevent visual monotony. This is considered a significant impact. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant effect, as follows: b. Final plans for landscape improvements along the Highway I I I and Adams Street frontages shall incorporate a screen wall design that avoids a monotonous visual effect, through a meandering alignment, use of offsets, periodic variations in materials, texture, or colors or other measures which achieve the desired effect. C. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts 1. AirQuality: Construction period emissions would exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District thresholds of significance, resulting in short-term, significant air quality impacts. The following changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which would reduce the volume of such emissions to the extent considered feasible, but not to below a level of significant. a. The project developer shall prepare and implement a construction management plan, as approved by the City of La Quinta, which includes the following measures recommended by the SCAQMD, or equivalently effective measures approved by the SCAQMD: (1) Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference. ' (2) Provide temporary traffic controls during all phases of construction activities to maintain traffic flow (e.g., flag person). (3) Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial, system to off-peak hours. (4) Reroute construction trucks away from congested streets. (5) Consolidate truck deliveries when possible. (6) Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on- and off -site. (7) Prohibit truck idling in excess of two minutes. (8) Maintain equipment and vehicle engines in good condition and in proper tune as per manufacturers' specifications and per SCAQMD rules, to minimize exhaust emissions. (9) Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. Contact the SCAQMD at 800/242-4022 for daily forecasts. (10) Use electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel - or gasoline -powered generators. (11) Use methanol- or natural gas -powered mobile equipment and pile drivers instead of diesel if readily available at competitive prices. (12) Use propane- or butane -powered on -site mobile equipment instead of gasoline if readily available at competitive prices. b. The developer shall prepare and implement a PM 10 Plan based on the measures of SCAQMD Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, which are in effect at the time of development. The following measures are currently recommended to implement Rule 403, Fugitive Dust. These measures have been quantified by the SCAQMD as being able to reduce dust generation between 30 and 85 percent depending on the source of the dust generation. (1) Apply approved non -toxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturer's specification to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for four days or more). (2) Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. b Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply approved soil binders to exposed piles (i.e., gravel, sand, dirt) according to manufacturers' specifications. (3) Water active grading sites at least twice daily. (4) Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph. (5) Provide temporary wind fencing consisting of three- to five-foot barriers with 50 percent or less porosity along the perimeter of sites that have been cleared or are being graded. (6) All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., minimum vertical distance between top of the load and the top of the trailer), in accordance with Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code. (7) Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried over to adjacent roads (recommend water sweepers using reclaimed water if readily available). (8) Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto paved roads, or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip. (9) Apply water three times daily or chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications to all unpaved parking or staging areas or unpaved road surfaces. (10) Enforce traffic speed limits of 15 mph or less on all unpaved roads. Operational emissions (primarily traffic exhaust) would exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District thresholds of significance, resulting in long-term, significant air quality impacts. The following changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which would reduce the volume of such emissions considered feasible, but not to below a level of significant. C. Where applicable, business owners and operators shall implement all rules and regulations adopted by the Governing Board of the SCAQMD which are applicable to their individual commercial use (such as Rule 402, Nuisance, Rule 1102, Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaners, Rule 1111, NOx Emissions from Natural Gas -Fired, Fan -Type Central Furnaces, Rule 1146, Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters) and which are in effect at the time of occupancy. d. Where feasible, use solar or low emission water heaters to reduce natural gas consumption and emissions. e. Use energy -efficient and automated controls for air conditioners to reduce energy consumption and emissions. f. Use automatic lighting on/off controls and energy -efficient lighting to reduce electricity consumption and associated emissions. g. Use light-colored roofing materials as opposed to dark roofing materials. These materials would reflect, rather than absorb, sunlight and minimize heat gains in buildings. This measure would lessen the overall demand for mechanical air conditioning systems. h. Comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations which are current at the time of development. i. If any drive -through windows are proposed at a later date on the commercial portion of the site, traffic flow at these drive-throughs shall be improved by designing separate windows for different functions and by providing temporary parking for orders not immediately ready for pickup. j. Provide bicycle facility improvements on the project site with access to off -site roadways. k. Implement all mitigation measures identified in Section 5.5, Transportation and Circulation for intersection improvements that would reduce traffic congestion. queuing. Implement an on -site vehicle circulation plan to reduce vehicle in. Provide on -site pedestrian facility improvements. II. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS A. Impacts Determined to be Less than Significant Impacts 1. Potential Secondary Land Use Effects: This project would not contribute to any significant cumulative land use impacts. 2. Geotechnical Considerations: This project would not contribute to, and would not be affected by any significant cumulative impacts involving geotechnical considerations. 3. Air quality: The proposed project is consistent with the regional Air Quality Management Plan and would thus not jeopardize attainment of the air quality goals contained in that plan. 4. Noise: This project would not contribute to significant cumulative noise impacts. 5. Public Services: This project would not contribute to significant cumulative impacts on County Fire Department, County Sheriff Department or private emergency medical services. 6. Aesthetics: This project would not contribute to any significant cumulative impacts on local or regional aesthetics. 7. Cultural Resources: This project would not contribute to any significant cumulative impacts involving cultural resources. B. Impacts That Could be Significant, But are Mitigable to Less Than Significant 1. Hydrology/Water uality: During construction, loose soils could be wind-blown or carried off -site by stormwater runoff that could reach the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, which flows into the Whitewater Channel, a regional flood control facility that ultimately outlets at the Salton Sea. In addition, contaminants from construction staging and storage areas, such as spilled fuels, lubricants and cleaning agents, if not contained, could also be carried by stormwater runoff to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel and Whitewater Channel. Runoff could from this project site could combine with other off -site sources of water pollution that reach the Whitewater Channel and could result in significant cumulative water quality impacts at the Salton Sea. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant effect, as follows: a. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) shall be completed, to the satisfaction of the Colorado Regional Water Quality Control Board and the City of La Quinta. The SWPPP shall include measures to minimize the generation of fugitive dust, prevent erosion and prevent and contain hazardous materials spills. Specific elements of the SWPPP may include, but are not limited to: (1) Dust controls as specified in project PM 10 plan (see Section 5.6 Air Quality for further description). inlets. (2) Installation of sand bags at existing and proposed storm drain (3) Soil stabilizing of future phase areas after rough grading. (4) Covering construction access roads with gravel. (5) Watering site throughout grading. (6) Minimize the number of separate construction and vehicle storage and staging areas, to simplify the collection and disposal of contaminants. (7) Identifying the location of fuel storage areas. (8) Erect barriers around vehicle storage and staging areas and around fuel storage areas, to prevent intrusion by unauthorized persons after construction hours. (9) An ongoing monitoring plan, to ensure that water quality controls are repeated and properly implemented in subsequent construction phases. The monitoring plan should include objectives, parameters for monitoring, schedules, evaluation and actions required. Provide regular monitoring reports, throughout each construction phase. 2. Transportation and Circulation: Projected year 2000 traffic volumes at four intersections would exceed the City's level of service standard, with or without the project traffic. A fifth intersection is projected to operated at a deficient level of service in the year 2005, with or without the project traffic. These are considered significant cumulative impacts. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid these potentially significant effects, as follows: a. Lane improvements at the Washington Street/Highway III intersection were completed by the City of La Quinta on May 1, 1997. b. A traffic signal is programmed for installation in 1997 by the City of La Quinta, at the intersection of Washington St./48th Avenue. The project developer will participate in this improvement through payment of the City's standard Infrastructure Development Fee. C. A traffic signal is programmed for installation in 1997 by the City of La Quinta. at the intersection of Dune Palms Road/Highway 111. The project developer will participate in this improvement through payment of the City's standard Infrastructure Development Fee. d. A traffic signal, plus northbound left turn lane and southbound left turn lane improvements, are needed at the intersection of Jefferson St./Miles Avenue by the year 2000, with or without the proposed project. This intersection is 75 percent within the jurisdiction of the City of Indio, and 25 percent within the City of La Quinta. Seventy-five percent of the costs of these improvements will be the responsibility of the City of Indio and the CVAG Regional Arterial Fund, while the remaining 25 percent would be the responsibility of the City of La Quinta. The City of La Quinta will coordinate with CVAG to ensure that these improvements are included in the CVAG regional arterial fund and will commit its share of funding at the time the balance of funding is available for these improvements. The project developer will participate in this improvement through payment of the City's standard Infrastructure Development Fee. e. Northbound and southbound through lanes will need to be added to the intersection of Washington St./Fred Waring Drive, by the year 2005, with or without the proposed project. This intersection is 50 percent within La Quinta, 25 percent within Palm Desert and 25 percent within unincorporated Riverside County. The City of La Quinta will be responsible for 50 percent of the costs of these improvements, while the City of Palm Desert, Riverside County and the CVAG Regional Arterial Fund would be responsible for the other 50 percent. The City of La Quinta will coordinate with CVAG to ensure that these improvements are included in the CVAG regional arterial fund and will commit its share of funding at the time the balance of funding is available for these improvements. The project developer will participate in this improvement through payment of the City's standard Infrastructure Development Fee. 3. Air Quality: Without emission reduction measures, project operational emissions would not achieve the SCAQMD's performance standard for annual emissions reductions, which would be considered a significant cumulative impact. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant effect., as follows: a. Where applicable, business owners and operators shall implement all rules and regulations adopted by the Governing Board of the SCAQMD which are applicable to their individual commercial use (such as Rule 402, Nuisance, Rule 1102, Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaners, Rule 1111, NOx Emissions from Natural Gas -Fired, Fan -Type Central Furnaces, Rule 1146, Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen from Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Heaters) and which are in effect at the time of occupancy. b. Where feasible, use solar or low emission water heaters to reduce natural gas consumption and -emissions. C. Use energy -efficient and automated controls for air conditioners to reduce energy consumption and emissions. d. Use automatic lighting on/off controls and energy -efficient lighting to reduce electricity consumption and associated emissions. e. Use light-colored roofing materials as opposed to dark roofing materials. These materials would reflect, rather than absorb, sunlight and minimize heat gains in buildings. This measure would lessen the overall demand for mechanical air conditioning systems. f. Comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations which are current at the time of development. g. If any drive -through windows are proposed at a later date on the commercial portion of the site, traffic flow at these drive-throughs shall be improved by designing separate windows for different functions and by providing temporary parking for orders not immediately ready for pickup. h. Provide bicycle facility improvements on the project site with access to off -site roadways. i. Implement all mitigation measures identified in Section 5.5, Transportation and Circulation for intersection improvements that would reduce traffic congestion. queuing. Implement an on -site vehicle circulation plan to reduce vehicle k. Provide on -site pedestrian facility improvements. 4. Water Distribution and Storage: Cumulative and long-term water demand throughout La Quinta and the rest of the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) service area could result in significant overdrafting of available groundwater supplies and could result in water shortages at various times and in various places within the valley. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid this potentially significant effect, as follows: a. . The City of La Quinta will continue to cooperate with CVWD strategies to manage regional water supplies and distribution facilities. Examples of such strategies currently being implemented or under consideration as part of the CVWD's water management planning program include: (1) To meet the projected regional water demand for the year 2015, CVWD has estimated that another 220 acres of ponds for recharge would be needed in the lower valley„ This would allow for percolation of approximately 82,000 acre feet of water per year. If such ponding areas cannot be found in the lower valley, the needed replenishment could be made up by converting current well users (farmers, fish farmers, golf courses and duck clubs) to canal water or other surface sources in the lower valley. (2) Additional replenishment could be achieved through importation of another 41,000 acre feet to supplement groundwater recharge efforts in the upper valley, conserving an additional 25,000 acre feet of water after initial use for fish farms, increasing reclaimed water use on golf courses by 11,000 acre feet, implementing conservation measures on golf courses to save an additional 9,000 acre feet and improving agricultural conservation to save another 5,000 acre feet. It is anticipated that most of the money required to implement and operate CVWD's water plan would come through assessments collected from pump owners for the cost of replacing the amount of water they extract from the basin. Major groundwater users in the upper valley, including the CVWD, have been paying such fees for nearly 20 years. C. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts 1. Solid Waste Disposal: Local landfill capacity is currently projected to be exhausted by the year 2006, and possibly as early as the year 2002, if wastes currently disposed of at the Coachella Sanitary Landfill (scheduled to close in May, 1997) and Mecca II Sanitary Landfill (scheduled to close in the year 2000) are diverted to the Edom Hill Sanitary Landfill, thus accelerating the filling of the Edom Hill landfill more rapidly than with current disposal rates. No other landfills or solid waste recovery/transfer facilities have been approved and programmed for development and operation in the Coachella Valley at this time. Landfill capacity in the rest of Riverside County is projected to be exhausted by the year 2008, approximately three years after the anticipated time of full project occupancy. The project's ongoing, long-term solid waste generation, therefore, would contribute to significant cumulative impacts on the valley -wide and county -wide solid waste disposal systems. The following changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which would reduce the project's solid waste impacts to the extent considered feasible, but would not reduce the level of impact to less than significant if regional solutions to the county's solid waste disposal facilities needs are not developed by the year 2008. a. Green waste generated on the project site shall be treated in such a way as to avoid disposal in landfills. This may be accomplished, for example, by composting either on -site or at approved facilities and mulching for use on- and off -site. b. Prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase of the project, a solid waste management program shall be approved for that portion of the site or for larger areas if more efficient, by the City of La Quinta. These programs shall maximize the recycling potential of packaging materials (cardboard), mixed papers, and scrap ferrous materials, and shall include designated areas for trash separation bins which are accessible to waste haulers, and identification of materials that are to be recycled. The following provisions shall be considered in the preparation of the plans: (1) Locate recycling/separation areas in close proximity to dumpsters for non-recyclables, elevators, loading docks, and primary internal and external access points. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). (2) Locations of recycling/separation areas shall not conflict with any applicable federal, state or local laws relating to fire, building, access, transportation, circulation, or safety. (3) Locate recycling/separation areas so they are convenient for those persons who deposit, collect, and load the recyclable materials. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). (4) Place recycling containers/bins so that they do not block access to each other. (5) Solid waste collection/recycling areas are to be compatible with nearby structures, secure, protected against adverse environmental conditions, clearly marked, adequate in capacity, number and distribution, and contain a sufficient number of bins, to serve the recycling needs of the development. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). (6) Design and construct collection/recycling areas to accommodate front -loader packing trucks, including maneuvering room. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). (7) Design and construct driveways and/or travel aisles with adequate width and maneuverability space for unobstructed garbage collection vehicle access and clearance. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). (8) Post signs at all access points of the recycling areas that clearly identify all recycling and solid waste collection and loading areas and the materials accepted therein. (From CIWMB Model Ordinance). III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED A. Reduced Density Alternative: This alternative consists of the same mix of auto sale/services and retail/mixed commercial activities in the proposed project, in the same basic site plan configuration, but with a reduction in development intensity of 25 percent. The same type and level of on -site environmental impacts would occur with this project or the proposed project. A similar level of impact on public services and land use would occur with this alternative or the proposed project. Off -site impacts attributable to this project's vehicular traffic generation (including traffic noise and automotive exhaust emissions), water distribution and storage, and solid waste disposal would be reduced by approximately 25 percent, compared to the proposed project. These reductions would not, however, reduce the significant and unavoidable air quality or cumulative solid waste impacts associated with the proposed project, to below a level of significant. After implementation of the recommended mitigation measures for the proposed project or this alternative, the level of "net" impact significance (level of impact significance, after application of mitigation measures) for each would be the same, i.e. less than significant, except for air quality and cumulative solid waste impacts. This alternative was rejected as infeasible, because, according to the applicant, it would not meet their objective for return on investment in the subject property. Furthermore, this alternative would not be environmentally superior to the proposed project, with respect to net environmental impact. B. Hotel/Golf/Office Alternative: This alternative is defined as 220,000 square feet of general office space on the northern quarter of the site along Highway 111; a hotel/conference facility with 400 guest rooms and 80,000 square feet of conference space; and a 9-hole golf course covering approximately half of the site area, meandering through the hotel/conference facilities. The same type and level of on -site environmental impacts would occur with this project or the proposed project. A similar level of impact on public services and land use would occur for this alternative or the proposed project. Water demand for this alternative could be higher, lower, or about the same as the proposed project, depending upon the type and intensity of uses for irrigation and interior plumbing and the effectiveness of water conservation efforts. Off -site impacts attributable to traffic generation (including traffic noise and automotive exhaust emissions), would be reduced by approximately 67 percent, compared to the proposed project. Total solid waste generation would be reduced, by about 42 percent, compared to the proposed project. These reductions would not, however, reduce the significant and unavoidable air quality or cumulative solid waste impacts associated with the proposed project, to below a level of significant. After implementation of the recommended mitigation measures for the proposed project or this alternative, the level of net impact significance for each would be the same, i.e. less than significant, except for air quality and cumulative solid waste impacts. This alternative was rejected as infeasible because it is not capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time. A completely different site plan would have to be developed, at extra cost and several months of additional time, and new tenants would have to be found who would enter into an agreement with the developer to occupy the commercial spaces created by this alternative development. These considerations represent substantial obstacles that would preclude the successful implementation of this alternative in a reasonable period of time, and, according to the applicant, this alternative would not satisfy their objective for return on investment in this property. Furthermore, this alternative would not be environmentally superior to the proposed project, with respect to net environmental impact. C. Alternative Site Location: This alternative consists of developing the proposed project at an alternative location located on a vacant, 65 acre site bordered by Highway 111, Adams Street and Washington Street, wet of the proposed project site. The same type and level of on -site environmental impacts would occur with this project or the proposed project. A similar level of impact on public services or land use would occur for this alternative or the proposed project. Off -site impacts related to traffic generation (including traffic noise and exhaust emissions), water distribution and storage, and solid waste disposal would be the same for this alternative or the proposed project. In either scenario, significant and unavoidable air quality and cumulative solid waste impacts would result. This alternative was rejected as infeasible because it is not capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time. A completely different site plan would have to be developed, at extra cost and several months of additional time. Furthermore, the project applicant does not own or have any substantial interest in this alternative site, and it is not known whether the property owner would sell the property to this project applicant or if the applicant would be able to acquire the property on terms satisfactory to the applicant, the alternative site property owner and the occupants of the proposed auto mall. These considerations represent substantial obstacles that would preclude the successful implementation of this alternative in a reasonable period of time, and, according to the applicant, would not satisfy their objective for return on investment in this property. Furthermore, this alternative would not be environmentally superior to the proposed project. D. No -Project, Existing Conditions Alternative: In this alternative, the project site would remain vacant, and would require acquisition by some entity committed to preserving the site in an undeveloped state. This alternative would avoid all of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. This alternative was rejected as infeasible because it does not accomplish the objectives of the City's General Plan Land Use Element, which designates this site for Mixed/Regional Commercial uses to strengthen the City's economic base and provide a range of commercial and/or institutio%al services for the community. The City has not identified this site for acquisition for any public needs. Furthermore, this alternative would not accomplish the applicant's objective of obtaining a return on investment in this property. E. No -Project, Mixed/Regional Commercial Alternative: This alternative is a development scenario consistent with the La Quinta General Plan land use designation for the proposed project site of Mixed/Regional commercial, at the maximum allowable intensity permitted for that land use category (floor area ratio of 0.35). Under this scenario, a variety of regional commercial, recreational, institutional and residential uses could be developed, pursuant to a planning framework and development regulations set forth in a specific plan. With an F.A.R. of 0.35, approximately 1.3 million square feet of space could be built, roughly twice the size of the proposed 675,000 square foot project. Environmental impacts on -site would be the same for this alternative or the proposed project:. Land use impacts could be equivalent, lower, or greater than with the proposed project, depending upon the specific mix of land uses and tenants involved. Impacts to public services and all other off -site impacts, however, would be substantially increased, due to the significantly higher development intensity. This alternative was rejected because it would result in a greater level of environmental impact than the proposed project, and is not necessary to meet the developer's or the City's objectives for the project site. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28525 TO ALLOW A 10-LOT COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION AND LETTERED LOTS "A", "B", AND "C" ON APPROXIMATELY 87 ACRES CASE NO.: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28525 APPLICANT: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of July, 1997, hold duly noticed Public Hearing to review the request for a 10 lot subdivision with lettered lots located on the south side of Highway 111, between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road, the more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST AND NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 29, T5S, R7E WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel 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 a Final Environmental Impact Report, under Environmental Assessment 97-337 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 of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Tentative Parcel Map 28525: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, Zoning Code, and Subdivision Ordinance. The property is designated Mixed/Regional Commercial per the General Plan which permits the uses proposed for the property and is consistent with the goals, policies, and intent of the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) provided conditions are met. RESOPC90-13 /28409-13 Planning Commission Resolution 97- B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans. All streets and improvements in the project, as conditioned, will conform to City standards as outlined in the General Plan, Subdivision Ordinance, and La Quinta Centre Specific Plan. All on -site streets are public and designed per the standards of the Circulation Element (Chapter 3.0) of the General Plan. C. The design of the subdivision, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The vacant site is suitable for development based on the Environmental Impact Report prepared for this project. Development will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat provided mitigation measures are met. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each commercial lot. The project will be instrumental in causing new area -wide public infrastructure improvements to be constructed, which will benefit both existing development and other future development, including but not limited to street improvements and public utility improvements. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Parcel 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; RESOPC90-13 !28409-13 Planning Commission Resolution 97- 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 to the City Council of Tentative Parcel Map 28525 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 8th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC'90-13 /28409-13 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28525 AUTO SALES AND SERVICES MALL AND MIXED COMMERCIAL CENTER JULY 8, 1997 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 2. Tentative Tract Map No. 28525 shall comply with the requirements and standards of § § 66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District • Imperial Irrigation District • California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For subdivisions requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works Department. 4. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. PAPC PW Coa TT28252.wpd -1- Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 5. All easements, rights of way and other property rights required of the tentative map or otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the process of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or a waiver of parcel map. The conferral shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of all essential improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels. 6. Prior to approval of a final map, parcel map or grading plan and prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish proof of temporary or permanent easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 7. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties. 8. The applicant shall dedicate public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 9. Dedications required of this development include: A. State Route 111 (S.R. 111) - (Major Arterial) - 70-foot half right of way or additional if required by Caltrans or the design of the approved construction and access plans for this parcel map. If required by Caltrans, acquire and deed additional right of way as necessary for widening of the median and resulting northward shift of the north side of the highway. B. Adams Street (Primary Arterial) - 55-foot half right of way. C. Right of way for public streets within the parcel map shall conform with the proposed Tentative Parcel Map received by the City on March 3, 1997. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, etc. PAPC PW Coa TT28252.wpd -2 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 If the City Engineer determines that public access rights to proposed street rights of way shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating the rights of way, the applicant shall grant temporary public access easements to those areas within 60 days of written request by the City. 10. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets (if any). 11. The applicant shall create perimeter setback lots, of minimum width as noted, adjacent to the following street rights of way: A. S. R. 111 - Fifty feet B. Adams Street - Twenty feet C. Interior Public Roads - As required by the General Plan and City Code unless otherwise approved in the specific plan for this development. Minimum widths may be used as average widths if meandering wall designs are approved. Where public sidewalks are required or placed on privately -owned setback lots, the applicant shall dedicate blanket sidewalk easements over the setback lots. 12. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to Adams Street and S. R. 111. Access to these streets shall be restricted to access points listed hereinafter or as approved by the City. 13. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 14. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer. lam_ fJ� �►� �� 15. As part of the filing package for final map approval, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map P:\PC PW Coa 7r28252.wpd -3 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 checker, on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions including approved revisions to the plans. 16. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 17. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 18. When final plans are approved by the City, and prior to approval of the final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions including approved revisions to the plans. PAPC PW Coa TT28252.wpd -4- Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mail and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 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 agendization of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, 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 approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 21. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the conditions of approval, a phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a construction sequencing plan for that phase is approved by the City Engineer. 22. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements and development -wide improvements (ie: retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates, etc.) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. PAPC PW Coa 7r28252.wpd -5 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 23. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for applicant's required share of improvements which are not constructed by applicant as part of the initial off -site improvements (participatory improvements). Participatory improvements for this development include: A. Traffic signal at Adams Street and Avenue 47 - 100 percent of the cost to design and construct. 24. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 25. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 26. The applicant shall comply with the City's flood protection ordinance. 27. The applicant shall furnish a thorough preliminary geological and soils engineering report (the "soils report") with the grading plan. 28. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 29. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at the interface of this development with abutting properties and of separate tracts within this development, if any. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a tract, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. NPC PW Coa T728252.wpd -6 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 If the applicant is unable to comply with the pad elevation differential requirement, the City will consider and may approve alternatives that preserve community acceptance and buyer satisfaction with the proposed development. 30. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document, bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor, that lists actual building pad elevations for the building lots. The document shall list the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 96.03 and the following: 31. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm shall be retained within the development unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 32. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual -lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2312 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is determined by the City Engineer to be impracticable. If individual -lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet all individual -lot retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC. 33. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data indicating otherwise. 34. A trickling sand filter and leachfield of a design approved by the City Engineer shall be installed to percolate nuisance water. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. 35. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall not exceed six feet and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1. For retention basins on individual residential lots, retention depth shall not exceed two feet. PAPC PW Coa TT' -7 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 36. If approved by the City Engineer, stormwater may be retained in landscape parkways along streets. Retention facilities in parkways and street rights of way shall have maximum retention depths of two feet and maximum side slopes of 5:1. 37. In developments for which security will be provided by public safety entities, ie: the La Quinta Code Enforcement Department or the Riverside County Sheriff's Department, all areas of common retention basins shall be visible from the adjacent street(s). No fence or wall shall be constructed around retention basins except as approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 38. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 39. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. 40. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 41. If the applicant proposes, and the City approves, drainage of stormwater or nuisance water to off -site locations, the applicant may be required to design and install first -flush storage, oil/water separation devices, or other screening or pretreatment method(s) to minimize conveyance of contaminants to off -site locations. If the drainage will directly or indirectly enter public waterways, the applicant and, subsequently, the parcel owners' association shall be responsible for any sampling and testing of effluent which may 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 the such discharge of the development's stormwater or nuisance water. UTILITIES 42. All existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. High -voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are exempt from this requirement. 43. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. PAPC PW Coa TT28252.wpd -g Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 44. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map or issuance of a certificate of comp0iance for any waived final map, the development or portions thereof may be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street and traffic improvements required herein. 45. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) S.R. 111 from the east side of the "La Quinta Centre Drive" to and including the Adams Street intersection (Major Arterial) - Construct applicant's half of a 116-foot (curbface to curbface) street improvement. Construct a 28-foot-wide raised landscape median, widen north half as required for the widened median, install traffic signal at "La Quinta Centre Drive.". 2) Adams Street from the south boundary of this parcel map to S.R. 111 (Primary Arterial) - Construct applicant's half of an 86-foot (curbface to curbface) improvement and a full -width (18-foot) raised landscape median. Construct traffic signal modifications as required. B. ON -SITE PUBLIC STREETS Public streets within this development shall conform with the sections shown on the proposed Tentative Parcel Map received by the City on March 3, 1997. Main entry streets and interior circulation routes, bus turnouts, acceleration/deceleration lanes, and/or other features contained in the approved construction plans may warrant additional street widths or other measures as determined by the City Engineer. PAPC PW Coa M8252.wpd -9- Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 46. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted to the following locations: A. "Auto Centre Drive" shall intersect with Adams Street opposite of and aligned with Avenue 47 (on the west side of Adams Street). B. "La Quinta Centre Drive" located between Parcel 3 and Parcel 10 of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map received by the City on March 3, 1997. 47. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings and devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 48. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the City's standards and practices. 49. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by registered professional engineer(s) authorized to practice in the State of California. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. 50. Street right of way geometry for cuts de sac, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 51. All streets proposed to serve residential or other access driveways shall be designed and constructed with vertical curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas and to facilitate street sweeping. PAPC PW Coa 7r28252.wpd -10- Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 52. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for a 20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows: Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" The listed structural sections are minimums, not defaults. Street pavement sections shall be designed using Caltrans design procedures with site -specific data for soil strength and traffic volumes. The applicant shall submit current (no more than two years old) mix designs for base materials, Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, including complete mix design lab results, for review and approval by the City. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (no more than six months old at the time proposed for construction) aggregate gradation test results to confirm that the mix design gradations can be reproduced in production of the base or paving material. Construction operations shall not be scheduled until mix designs are approved. 53. Prior to occupancy of permanent buildings within the development, the applicant shall install all street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices and street name signs along access routes to those buildings. If on -site streets are initially constructed with only a portion of the full thickness of pavement, the partial section shall be designed to the 20-year design strength. 54. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback areas or lots along Adams Street and S. R. 111. 55. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas, medians, common retention basins, and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans PAPC PW Coa TT28252.wpd -1 1- Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. 56. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way. 57. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 5-feet of curbs along public streets. 58. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 59. The applicant shall provide public transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit and/or the City Engineer. 60. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 61. The subdivider shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing not included in the City's permit inspection program but which are required by the City to provide evidence that materials and their placement comply with plans and specifications. 62. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 63. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As - Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the plan computer files previously submitted to the City to reflect the as -constructed condition. PAPC PW Coa TT28252.wpd -12- Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 28525 Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 64. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage and landscaping improvements. The applicant shall maintain public improvements until final acceptance of improvements by the City Council. 65. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 66. Prior to approval of a final map or completion of any approval process for modification of boundaries of the property subject to these conditions, the applicant shall process a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against the property and pay the cost of the reapportionment. PAPC PW Coa M8252.wpd -13- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029 CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029 APPLICANT: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 81h day of July, 1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Specific Plan 97-029 to allow a mixed use phased development consisting of a combination of automobile sales/services retail, office, commercial services, and restaurants on 87 acres, located on the south side of Highway 111, between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road„ and more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST AND NORTHWEST 1 /4 SECTION OF 29, T5S, R7E WHEREAS, said Specific Plan complies 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 Impact Report under Environmental Assessment 97-337 which states this Specific Plan Amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment based on mitigation measures. It has been determined that, although the project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, the mitigation measures mitigate those project impacts to levels of insignificance. 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 Specific Plan: 1. That the proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the property is designated Mixed/Regional Commercial which permits the uses proposed for the property and is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) provided conditions are met. RESOPC.97605 Planning Commission Resolution 97- 2. That the Specific Plan will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare in that development per the Specific Plan will provide for extensive public improvements and conforms to good land use practice by encouraging a long-range, comprehensive approach to development of a major regional automobile sales/services and mixed commercial complex. 3. The Specific Plan is compatible with the zoning of adjacent properties in that the site is bounded by compatible mixed/regional (commercially zoned) designated properties with the exception of the area to the west, across Adams Street that is designated Low Density and High Density Residential. The EIR mitigation measures will ensure potentially negative impacts, such as noise and lighting, as they will be reduced to a level of insignificance by landscape buffers, walls, site configurations and shielding to prevent glare and spillage. 4. The Specific Plan is suitable and appropriate for the subject property provided the EIR mitigation measures and Conditions of Approval are met. 5. That the proposed Specific Plan is a detailed plan for development in a specific area; further review of individual buildings will be required under a Site Development Permit review process at which time project related conditions will be attached to mitigate impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval 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 City Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: RESOPC.97605 Planning Commission Resolution 97- AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.97605 RESOLUTION 97- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029 - AUTO SALES AND SERVICES MALL AND MIXED COMMERCIAL CENTER JULY 8, 1997 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Prior to issuance of the first building permit the applicant shall revise the Specific Plan as follows: 1. Section 1.20.2 11 (Pp. 4) - "La Quinta Centre Drive" (here & throughout the document) conflicts with the existing "La Quinta Center Drive" which is the first signalized intersection to the west of Adams Street. 7. Section 1.20.2 12 - Near the end of the first sentence, initial improvements to Highway 111 shall include completion of the Highway 111 /"La Quinta Centre Drive" intersection and traffic signal, installation of a 28-foot wide landscape median and widening on the north side to accommodate the widened median. 8. Section 2.10.3 - To the end of the second to last sentence, add the following: "though turf and spray irrigation will not be placed closer than five feet from public sidewalks or street curbs. 9. Section 2.20.2, 11 (Pp. 12) - In the first sentence, after "(half street)," add "from Adams Street to "La Quinta Centre Drive," including modification/completion of both intersections." 10. Section 2.30.4 (currently misnumbered as 2.30.3), 11 (Pp. 17) - Add the following paragraph: "All washdown water and runoff from service, fueling and used -vehicle storage areas shall be routed through oil/water separation devices approved by the City prior to disposal in retention/percolation facilities. The applicant and, eventually, the Property Owner's Association shall schedule regular inspections of the separation devices to ensure that accumulations of petroleum products and contaminated nuisance water are pumped from the devices and disposed of in accordance with law. 11. Section 2.60.1 (Pp. 36) - In the second sentence, the "half street of 86 feet" should refer to right of way, not improvement width, and should be changed to 70 feet. To the end of the second to last sentence, add the following: "including additional right of way on the north side of Highway 111, if required by Caltrans, to accommodate widening of the median. P:\cd\COA SP 97-029.wpd 1 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 97-029 - Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July 8, 1997 12. Section 2.60.2 12 (Pp. 36) - Revise this paragraph to indicate that the signal on Highway 111 shall be installed as part of the initial construction of off -site improvements. 13. Section 2.60.4.3 13 (Pp. 39) - Remove this paragraph. No temporary right- in/right-out drives will be allowed. 14. Exhibit 11 - Revise Section D-D (Adams Street) to show six-foot sidewalk. Revise section E-E (Hwy 111) to indicate full median construction and widening on the north (left) side to accommodate the widened median. 15. Exhibits 13 - 16 - Revise to comply with City requirement that there be no lawn areas or spray irrigation within five feet of sidewalks or street curbs. 16. Exhibits in general - Revise to indicate as follows: • Traffic signal on Highway 111 will be constructed by applicant as part of the initial construction of off -site improvements. • Highway 111 right of way dedication is for a half -street width of 70 feet. 17. Section 1.20.1 12 (p.2) - Change the sentence to read "Property to the south is vacant and is zoned Regional Commercial. 18. Exhibit 2 - 2 - (P. 7) Delete the 25' building separation. 19. Section 2.50.1.2 14 (p. 30) - Modify the paragraph to reflect what is recommended by the Planning Commission as to the best alternative in maintaining the view of the nearby mountain for the location of the five buildings in the northeast corner of the project site. Also, substitute 35' in height to 25' in height. 20. Section 2.50.4.1.31 (P. 35) - Revise the sentence "Service departments typically operate" ... to "shall operate only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. five or six days per week". 21. Section 2.80.1.1 21 (P. 44) - Correct item #1 to read "Product identification" instead of "Dealership Identification" P:\c&\COA SP 97-029.wpd 2 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 97-029 - Auto Sales and Services Mall and Mixed Commercial Center July S, 1997 Add 5. No building mounted signs will be allowed along Highway 111. 22. Exhibit 19 - (P. 52) Delete one of the two building -mounted identification signs. 23. Applicant agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out the City's approval of this project. P:WC COA SP 97-029.wpd 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ALLOW AUTOMOBILE SALES AND SERVICE CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-034 APPLICANT: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8t" day of July, 1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Stamko Development Company to*allow automobile sales and services at the southeast corner of Adams Street and Highway 111. WHEREAS, said Conditional Use Permit request has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended by Resolution 83-68, in that a Environmental Impact Report under Environmental Assessment 97-337 has been recommended with mitigation measures for certification; 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 a recommendation for approval of said Conditional Use Permit: The Conditional Use Permit is deemed consistent with the City's General Plan in that the site is designated mixed/regional commercial and proposed for automobile sales/service retail use. The automobile sales/services use is consistent with the goals and policies and intent of the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) provided conditions are met. 2. The approval of this Conditional Use Permit is consistent with the Zoning Code and Specific Plan in that construction of the automobile sales/services will conform to development standards outlined in the La Quinta Centre Specific Plan namely parking, lighting, building height and setbacks, signs and landscaping. 3. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared in accordance with CEQA recommended for certification. RESOPC.97605 Planning Commission Resolution 97- 4. The automobile sales/services use will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare or injurious to, or incompatible with, other land uses in that an EIR has been prepared with recommended mitigation measures reducing potentially negative impacts to a level of insignificance such as noise and lighting. Specifically, walls will enclose the auto sales and service uses, a public address system will not be allowed, and the service department will be a side entrance facility, opening away from the residential area and lighting will be directed downward and NOT allowed to spillover the property lines. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Conditional Use Permit 97-034 to allow automobile sales and service subject to the Conditions of Approval, attached hereto and made a part of as Exhibit "X. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 81" day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC V605 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-034 JULY 8, 1997 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The development shall comply with Specific Plan 97-034, and all applicable Conditions of Approval. 2. The approval of the Conditional Use Permit shall run concurrently with Specific Plan 97-034. 3. All service departments shall operate between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., six days per week. 4. The light fixtures along the east perimeter wall (Parcels 5, 6, and 7) adjacent to Adams Street shall be adequately shielded to eliminate light glare and/or spillage within the Lake La Quinta residential development. 5. If the landscape and lighting design permits, trees shall be clustered around the light poles along the east perimeter wall, adjacent to Adams Street (Parcels 5, 6, and 7). RESOPC.97605 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-603 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR FIVE AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIPS CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-603 APPLICANT: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8" day of July, 1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to review the development plans for five (5) auto dealerships located at the southeast corner of Adams Street and Highway 111, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST AND NORTHWEST 1/4 SECTION OF 29, TSS, R7E WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). The Community Development Department has prepared an Environmental Impact Report under Environmental Assessment 97-337 for this project which states the project will not have a significant impact on the environment based on mitigation measures; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Site Development Permit 97-603: The proposed car dealerships are consistent with the City's General Plan in that the property is designated Mixed/Regional Commercial (M/RC). The Land Use Element (Policy 2-3.1) of the 1992 General Plan Update allows automobile sales/services as a conditional use. The project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) provided conditions are met. 2. The; proposed auto dealerships are consistent with the goals and objectives of the La Quinta Centre Specific Plan in that the project is a permitted use and will comply with the development standards and design guidelines provided conditions are met. PAcd\SDP Res Draft Planning Commission Resolution 97- 3. The development auto dealerships will be consistent with the City's Zoning Code and the La Quinta Centre Specific Plan provided conditions are met. 4. The site design of the proposed project is compatible with the high quality of commercial development on Highway 111. 5. The landscape design,along Highway 111 generally conforms with the City's Highway 111 Landscape Design Guidelines. The Adams Street landscape setback is also of a high quality landscape design. 6. The architectural design of the project is compatible with development on Highway 111 in that it is a similar scale of other developments in the area; the building materials will be aesthetically pleasing, and provide a blend of varied surfaces and variety of textures, provided conditions are met. 7. The sign design of the project will provide building identity using common elements of size, color, and materials. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Site Development Permit 97-603 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 8` day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: P:\cd\SDP Res Draft Planning Commission Resolution 97- JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\cd\SDI' Res Draft RESOLUTION 97- CONIDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-603 - FIVE AUTO DEALERSHIPS JULY 8, 1997 1. The development shall comply with the La Quinta Centre Specific Plan, Specific Plan 97-029 (on file in the Community Development Department), the approved exhibits and the following conditions, which shall take precedence in the event of any conflicts with the provisions of the Specific Plan. 2. Exterior lighting for the project shall comply with the City's "Dark Sky" Lighting Ordinance. Lighting Plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department Director prior to issuance of building permits. All exterior lighting shall be down -shining and provided with shielding to screen glare from adjacent streets and residential property to the north and east to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department Director. Parking lot light standards shall be a maximum of 24-feet in height. All lights shall be shielded; specifically those light fixtures along the east property line (Parcels 5, 6, & 7) adjacent to Adams Street. 3. Provide adequate trash and recycling areas for each phase for approval by the Community Development Department Director prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The plan will be reviewed for acceptability by applicable trash company prior to review by the Community Development Department Director. 4. Prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, or ground disturbance, mitigation measures as recommended by the Archaeological Assessment for the site shall be completed at the applicant/developer's expense. This consists of having an archaeological monitor on site during grading and earth disturbance operations. A final report shall be submitted prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy of the first building. 5. Handicap access, facilities and parking shall be provided per State and local requirements. 6. Prior to any site disturbance being permitted, including construction, preliminary site work and/or archaeological investigation, the project developer shall submit and have approved a Fugitive Dust Control Plan (FDCP), in accordance with Chapter 6.16 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. The plan shall PACd\Coa SDP 97-603 1 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 97-603 - Five Auto Dealerships July 8, 1997 define all areas proposed for development and shall indicate time lines for phasing of the project, and shall establish standards for comprehensive control of both anthropogenic and natural creation of airborne dust due to development activities on site. Phased projects must prepare a plan that addresses control measures over the entire build -out of the project (e.g., for disturbed lands pending future development). 7. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. 8. Prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit, the applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 9. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of SP 97-603, and EA 97-337. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of SP 97-603 and EA 97-337. The Community Development Director may require inspection or other mitigation monitoring measures to assure such compliance. 10. All roof and wall mounted mechanical -type equipment shall be installed or screened with architecturally compatible material so as not to be visible from surrounding properties and streets to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and/or Planning Commission. Working drawings showing all proposed equipment and how they will be screened shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. P:\Cd\Coa SDP 97-603 2 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 97-603 - Five Auto Dealerships July 8�, 1997 11. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 12. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval of the underlying Tentative Parcel Map 28525 which conditions are included herein by reference. 13. Unless otherwise provided herein, these conditions shall apply to development of both the overall site and to individual sites within the auto mall and commercial center 14. Prior to the issuance of grading, improvement or building permits, 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) (Water & Sewer) - Imperial Irrigation District (IID) (Electricity) - California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) Caltrans The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. For projects requiring NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of an approved Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan. P:\Cd\Coa SDP 97-603 3 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 97-603 - Five Auto Dealerships July 8, 1997 15. Project improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Hough Grading, "Precise Grading," " Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the Community Development Direct and the Building Official. Plans are not approved unless, and until, they are signed. "Street and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 16. Individual site improvement plans (not including street or public facility construction) shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media. Plans for individual site improvements may be combined on a single plan provided excess clutter doesn't affect readability. Individual site plans shall include all hardscape, drainage and landscape improvements. Plans for parking areas and interior circulation routes shall include traffic striping and pavement markings, signing, pedestrian facilities, trash receptacles, and other features which may affect the safe flow of vehicles and pedestrians. All plans (except precise grading plans, if separate) shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. P:\Cd\Coa SDP 97-603 4 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 97-603 - Five Auto Dealerships July 8, 1997 If water and sewer plans are included on plans to be approved by the City Engineer, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. 17. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets form the City. 18. Improvements to be made or agreed upon shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 19. Prior to occupation of the project site or any individual site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. In accordance with said Chapter, the applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 20. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 21. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document, bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor, that lists actual building pad elevations for the building logs. The document shall list the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. P:\Cd\Coa SDP 97-603 5 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 97-603 - Five Auto Dealerships July 8, 1997 01 20. fM. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 96.03 and the following: 22. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm shall be retained within the development unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall include streets within the development and extend to the centerline of public streets adjacent to the development.. 23. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data indicating otherwise. 24. A trickling sand filter and leachfield or other percolation system approved by the City Engineer shall be installed to percolate nuisance water. The system shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. 25. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1 on private property, 5:1 on public property. Retention depth shall not exceed six feet on private property, two feet on public property. 26. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 27. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. 28. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 29. If the applicant proposes drainage of stormwater to off -site locations, the P:\Cd\Coa SDP 97-603 6 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 97-603 - Five Auto Dealerships July 8, 1997 applicant may be required to design and install first -flush storage, oil/water separation devices, or other screening or pretreatment method(s) to minimize conveyance of contaminants to off -site locations. If the drainage will directly or indirectly enter public waterways, the applicant and, subsequently, the Property Owners' Association, shall be responsible for any sampling and testing of effluent which may 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 the such discharge of the development's stormwater or nuisance water. The CC & Rs for the development shall reflect the existence of this potential obligation. 30. The applicant shall provide facilities, approved by the City Engineer, which intercept and percolate nuisance water. The facilities shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. For design purposes, the maximum percolation rate of native soils shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate shall be considered zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data which demonstrates otherwise. 31. For individual auto sales & service sites and other sites where stormwater contaminants are typically produced or deposited, all washdown water and runoff from service, fueling and used -vehicle storage areas shall be routed through oil/water separation devices approved by the City prior to disposal in retention/percolation facilities. The applicant and, eventually, the Property Owner's Association, shall schedule regular inspections of the separation devices to ensure that accumulations of petroleum products and contaminated runoff are pumped from the devices and disposed of in accordance with law LANDSCAPING 32. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas, medians, and retention basins shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. P:\Cd\Coa EW 97-603 7 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Condit:ions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 97-603 - Five Auto Dealerships July 8, 19!37 33. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way. 34. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 5-feet of curbs or sidewalks along public streets. 35. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 36. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback areas along S.R. 111 and on the east side of Adams Street. Undulating mounding shall be an average minimum of 3 feet in height. 37. If the landscape and lighting designs permit, clusters of trees shall be proposed around each light pole along the east perimeter wall, adjacent to Adams Street (Parcels 5, 6, & 7). 38. The tree sizes be specified on the landscape plan as a mix of 24 inch box, with a minimum of 2-1 /2" to 3" diameter as measured 6" from grade and 36 inch box, with a minimum of 4" diameter as measured 12" from grade. QUAD' ASSURANCE 39. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 40. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 41. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant applies for plan checking and permits. P:\Cd\Coa SDP 97-603 8 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Condit:ions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 97-603 - Five Auto Dealerships July 8, 1997 42. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. 43. Schedule E fire protection approved Super fire hydrants, (6" x 4"'x 2'/2" x 2'/2"1 will be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with any portion of any frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. 44. The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 5000 g.p.m. and an actual fire flow available from any two hydrant's shall be 2500 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 p.s.i. residual operating pressure. 45. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer will furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to Fire Department for review/approval. Plans will conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will meet the fire flow requirements. Plans will be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: °I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 46. 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. BUILD�(SS/FACILITIES 47. Install Knox Key Lock boxes, Models 4400, 3200 or 1300, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval of mounting location/position and operating standards. Special forms are available from the Riverside County Fire Department for ordering the Key Switch. This form must be authorized and signed by that office for the correctly coded system to be purchased. P:\Cd\,Coa SDP 97-603 9 Planning Commission Resolution 97- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 97-603 - Five Auto Dealerships July 8, 1997 48. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage, landscaping and on -site improvements. 49. Prior to issuance of building permits, the rear elevations of buildings on Parcels 1, 2, and 3 shall be revised to include additional design treatment and articulation such as trellises, stepped parapets, pilasters, etc., for approval by the Community Development Director. 50. Prior to issuance of a building permit for Parcel 5, the proposed parapet wall surrounding the roof parking area shall be increased to 5 %2' in height. Lighting shall be mounted on the interior of the parapet wall and no lighting shall be allowed that extends above the parapet wall. 51. Applicant agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. PXdToa S,DP 97-603 10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, STAMKO CASE NO.: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 97-002 APPLICANT: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of July, 1997, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for a Development Agreement; and, WHEREAS, said Development Agreement 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 prepared as Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 97011055) under Environmental Assessment 97-337 for Specific Plan 97-029, Conditional Use Permit 97-034, Parcel Map 28525 and Site Development Permit 97-603. Therefore, the Final Environmental Impact Report will adequately address the project; 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 Development Agreement: 1. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs of the City of La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 97-029. The property is within the Mixed/Regional Commercial (M/RC) District per the provisions of the 1992 General Plan Update which permits the proposed use and is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) provided conditions are met. 2. The land uses authorized and regulations prescribed for the Development Agreement are compatible with the zoning and its related regulations now applicable to the property. The site is zoned Regional Commercial (CR) which permits the proposed uses provided conditions are met. P:\Christi\Res DA97-002.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 97- 3. The proposed Development Agreement conforms with public convenience and the general welfare by providing for extensive public improvements and conforms to good land use practice by encouraging a long-range, comprehensive approach to the development of a major automobile sales/services and mixed commercial complex. The Agreement provides for development requirements that are in excess of City standards, such as the development density, intensity and potential adverse environmental impacts that are significantly more restrictive than those currently permitted under the applicable General Plan and Zoning Code provisions. In addition, entire landscape medians will be constructed on both Highway 111 and Adams Street. 4. Approval of this Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare since adequate provision has been made in previous City approvals to provide for necessary and desirable improvements and since these approvals are incorporated herein. 5. Approval of this Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of the subject or surrounding property nor the preservation of area - wide property values, but rather will enhance them by encouraging planned, phased growth. 6. Approval of the Development Agreement will provide a positive fiscal impact on the City by providing new revenue to the general fund for services. 7. Consideration of the Development Agreement has been accomplished pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864 et seq. and the City of La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.250.030, which govern Development Agreements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does recommend approval of the Development Agreement to the City Council. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this the 8th day of July, 1997, by the following vote, to wit: P:\Christi\Res DA97-002.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 97- AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\Christi\Res DA97-002.wpd Of a ty w 3 0 z w V) w Ln I o_ HWY 111 V) SITE < a TO INDIO-- w z J 0 N Ln AVENUE 48 V) z 0 z 0 0 z I = � � Q w 3 � AVENUE 50 VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE ATTACHMENT 1 �1 0 Ryy a r ee it dx d��td 46 6 6 Hill 11' i i d dd� d CE Z- a n a JuJ ! H r Et� N LO 00 N O z 0— c� G J w U oc Q a a z w F- I WAUMM I �1J � ffi ATTACHMEN L— L_ F- c&,, °f 4Q" MEMORANDUM TO: Community 'De elopment Department FROM: Chris Vo 6AH Public Works Director/City Engineer J� DATE: July 8, 1997 SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map 28525 The Public Works Department recommends the following revisions to the conditions of approval presented for Planning Commission consideration. The revisions will adapt the conditions to the current Development Agreement for the proposed auto mall and commercial/retail center: Condition No. 23: Delete this condition. Condition No. 45: Replace the last sentence of subparagraph A-2) with the following: "Construct traffic signal at Avenue 47. Modify traffic signal at Highway 111 as required by the improvements associated with this development." Wherever convenient: Add the following condition: "In the event of a conf'.Ict between the conditions listed herein and the provisions of the Development Agreement between the applicant and the City,, the provisions of the Development Agreement shall prevail unless such action or interpretation would result in violation of any applicable local, state or federal law." - dv� S FB/fb FAPR0JDEV\SP\97029.MEM Printed July 8, 1997 Page 1 of 1 T,it4t 4 4 Q" MEMORANDUM TO: Community evelopment Department FROM: Chris Public s Director/City Engineer DATE: July 8, 1997 SUBJECT: Specific Plan 97-029 - Auto Mall and Commercial Center The Public Works Department's original review of, and recommended conditions of approval for, the subject document were based on a late -stage draft which has since been revised. The Department recommends the following modifications to the conditions of approval to adapt them to the Specific Plan document to be presented for Planning Commission consideration. The condition numbers used here coincide with those shown in the Planning Commission packet. 7. Section 1.20.2 12 - Delete the portion of the condition following "traffic signal. 8. Section 2.10.3 - Delete the words "public sidewalks." 9. Section 2.20.2, 11 - Revise the page number to 14. Replace "(half street)" with "the first parenthesized statement." 10. Section 2.30.4 - Revise the page number to 19. 11. Section 2.60.1 - Revise page number to 37. Delete the first sentence. 12. Section 2.60.2 12 - Revise page number to 37. 13. Section 2.60.4.3 13 - Delete this condition. 14. (Exhibit 1 1) - Delete this condition. 15. (Exhibits 13 - 16) - Delete the words "sidewalks or." FB/fb F:\PR0JDEV\SP\97029.MEM Printed July 8, 1997 Page 1 of 1 Francisco J. Urbina Member: American Planning Association California Chapter, Inland Empire Section, Cahuilla Desert District 45-848 Paradise Palm Lane Indio, California 92201 June 8th, Year of Our Lord Nineteen Hundred Ninety Seven City of La Quinta Planning Commission 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA. RE: Comments on Draft EIR and Related Entitlement Cases for Proposed Project Titled: The Centre at La Quinta Dear Planning Commission Members: As a concerned Indio resident, I am writing this letter to express, for the record, my thoughts on the above referenced project. I agree with comments submitted on the subject project in letters written by the City of Indio Community Development Department and Indio's City Attorney. I hope that the Cities of La Quinta and Indio can resolve their differences over the subject project in a peaceful manner with the least amount of public tax dollars being expended to fund attorneys. Cooperation, instead of confrontation, should be everyone's goal here. Stamko Development and the City of La Quinta should also exercise compassion toward their poorer neighbor of the City of Indio (economically poorer that is, but certainly not spiritually poorer). Two of the Bible's 10 Commandments tell us to "love thy neighbor as thyself' and "thou shall not covet thy neighbor's goods." The Christian Bible also tells us to tells us that the love of money ("the almighty dollar") is the root of many of the evils in the world. As a 1986 graduate of the Master in City Planning Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.), I would like to suggest that the City of La Quinta consider contacting Professor Larry Susskind at M.I.T., a nationally recognized expert on mediation to solve conflicts, to explore mediation as a vehicle to help resolve issues regarding the subject project among competing parties. I have attached some excerpts from an American Planning Association Book Catalog and have outlined two books that I think would very worthwhile reading for City of La Quinta Planning Commissioners and City Council Members. Thank you listening and God bless us all. Sincerely, Francisco J. Urb a I Ethical Dilemmas in PIanning 1 hour of video education and workbook. 1993. Produced by PTS. $94.95, APA members $89.95. Expert panelists present different scenarios to illustrate the ethical aspects of problem :solving, decision making, and policy implemen- tation. The lively, humorous, and provocative discussion challenges planners to thank about the ethical dimension of their work. ®Teaching Ethics: An Introduction to American and Canadian Ethics 1 hour of video education and workbook. 1995. Produced by PTS. $94.95, APA members $89.95. Do you think planning ethics is only about conflicts of interest? Then tune into this video and see how the boundaries of the planning field are being expanded through ethical inquiry. Leading experts present an overview of the field of planning ethics. The video compares the development of Canadian and American codes of ethics and discusses how planning ethics can best be taught. Acting on Ethics in City Planning Elizabeth Howe. 1994. 395 pp. [Center for Urban Policy Research.] $29.95 (hard cover]. The issues you face as a planner often have ethical dimensions. This book explores how planners define ethical issues and make ethical choices. Howe interviewed almost 100 professional planners to show you how your colleagues maintain high ethical standards on the job. ® Planning Ethics: A Reader in Planning Theory, Practice and Education Sue Hendler, ed. 199.5. 374 pp. (Center for Urban Policy Research.) $19.95 (paperback]. A thoughtful, provocative look at the ethical dimensions of plan- ning. This collection, of essays addresses the theory, teaching, and practice of planning ethics. One group of articles explores the definitions of planning contained within alternative moral theories. Another illustrates how to apply ethical principles in planning for community development, land conversion, and waste management. Ethical Land Use: Principles of Policy and Planning Timothy Beatley. 1994. 302 pp. t johns Hopkins University Press.] $19.95 (paperback]; APA members $17.95. This book picks up where Aldo Leopold left off. It addresses the planner's search for a "land ethic" that balances economic consider- ations with concerns for beauty, sustainability, and quality of life. It examines the ethical dimensions of land -use decisions, with an underlying premise that all such decisions involve ethical choices. Beatley analyzes the difficult issues planners and policy makers face and proposes a practical set of principles for ethical land use to guide future policy and planning. ®Shared Values for a Troubled World: Conversations with Men and Women of Conscience Rushworth M..Kidder. 1994. 356 pp. tJossey-Bass.] $26 (hard cover). Planners aren't the only ones who deal with ethical issues in their work. Find out: how 24 leading political leaders, business people, writers, and artists responded to the question, "If you could develop a global code of ethics, what would it include?" Based on their responses, Shared Values for a Troubled World identifies eight universal values that enter into ethical decision making —love, truthfulness, fairness, freedom, unity, tolerance, responsibility, and respect for life. - The j) c N" ( . ( ) I F Pw itlonees Krmcs IN Guide PLANNING 5` ri$Cal Impact . A1rsby,' ETHICAL LAND USE PRINCIPLES POLICY AND PLANNING Shared Values For a. Troubled World t: M ■■l ORDERING 1' 1 ie APA Planners Book Service offers oks, reports, audio and video tapes, mputer software, and curricula on inning and related subiects. This anners Book Service catalog is APA's Best one ever. It features 518 items— Dre than 200 of them new. PA Products. The APA Planners Book rvice is the primary distributor for the (lowing lines of APA products: The Planners Press. APA's own press, ith more than 45 titles m print. PAS Reports. APA's Planning Advisory rvice (PAS) publishes eight reports fear. Tapes and Training Pac Uges. Audio and deo tapes and training packages aimed at ofessional planners are produced by the anners Training Service (PTS), the intinuing education arm of APA's profes- onal institute, the American Institute of ertified Planners. APA's Plann ng Commis- oners Service develops training materials r planning commissioners. esale Products. Besides the materials roduced by APA, this catalog includes over 30 books from more than 120 other ablishers. fanners Book Service: Online. APA's tanners Book Service is already on the 7orld Wide Web with basic information on PA products. Over the life of this catalog, re'll be developing a more sophisticated aline presence. We are planning to include lore detailed descriptions, cover art, and ibles of contents for select titles. Visit our reb site at http://www.l)lanning.org to find ut about new offerings and more detailed iformation on other items. Prices and Availability. Prices on APA and PAS products are good through December 1997. Prices and availability on resale items may change without notice during the life of this catalog. APA members qualify for special prices on many items. PAS subscrib. ers also qualify for the same prices quoted here for APA members. In addition, PAS subscribers receive a 50 percent discount on all PAS Reports. Shipping and Handling. Shipping and handling charges for U.S. and Canadian orders are based on the cost of the order (see the order form in this catalog for details). Most U.S orders are shipped by United Parcel Service (UPS). Please supply your street address instead of a post office box number to help us route your order by UPS. Standard and Rush Orders. Most orders are in our customer's hands within 10 days to two weeks after the Book Service receives an order. Expedited service is available at an extra charge. Next -day UPS shipping is $20, in addition to standard Planners Book Service shipping and handling fees. Second - day UPS shipping is $10, in addition to standard Planners Book Service shipping and handling fees. Allow two days for processing rush orders. You'll get faster service if you call or fax us your rush orders. Non-U.S. Orders. All orders originating outside the U.S. must be prepaid by Visa or Mastercard, by check in U.S. dollars on a U.S. bank, or by International Money Order. For quick service, you can fax orders to APA and pay by credit card. We will also send non-U.S. customers a pro forma invoice that includes shipment charges and insurance. Customers are responsible for all customs fees, all brokerage fees, and all taxes. ABOUT APA'. Vith more than 30,000 members, the lmerican Planning Association is the largest rational organibmtion actively working for letter planned communities. APA brings ogether practitioners, planning officials, tudents and interested citizens into a ingle—and stronger —community. Through its chapters and divisions, APA aves members systematic ways to work on iroblems in common and to affect national rlanning policies. the American Institute of Certified Planners s a part of APA that concentrates on the levelopment of the pla ung profession, its dandards and continuing education. 1Nith publications, research, workshops, and bnferences, APA prov:des professional aid o the planner and current information and idvice to all. APA Online. Our World Wide Web home page contains a lot more than just informa- tion about the Planners Book Service —and it's changing all the time. For the latest information on APA, visit our home page at http://www.planning.org. American Planning Association 122 S. Michigan Ave., Ste. 1600 Chicago IL 60603 Planners Book Service: 312.786.6344 (phone) 312-431-9985 (fax) BookService@planning.org (e-mail) General APA inquiries: 312.431-9100 (phone) 312-431.9985 (fax) APA(eplanning.org (e-mail) TABLE 1(ONTENTS AffordableHousing.................................................................... Architecture & Design................................................................ Capital Facilities......................................................................... Careers....................................................................................... CitizenParticipation................................................................... Commissions & Boards............................................................... Communication Skills................................................................. 1 Computers.................................................................................. 1 Conflict Resolution..................................................................... I Consultants................................................................................ I EconomicDevelopment.............................................................. 1 Environment.............................................................................. 1 Ethics......................................................................................... 2 Finance...................................................................................... 2 GeneralPlanning........................................................................ 2 GIS............................................................................................. 2 Greenways & Open Space........................................................... 2 GrowthManagement.................................................................. 2 Historic Preservation.................................................................. 3 Housing...................................................................................... 3 ImpactFees................................................................................ 3 Land Development..................................................................... 3 LandUse Law............................................................................ 3 Landscaping............................................................................... 4 LearningResources.................................................................... 4 Management.............................................................................. 4 Maps& Graphics........................................................................ 4 Neighborhoods........................................................................... 4 NewUrbanism........................................................................... 4 NIMBYs...................................................................................... c Parking....................................................................................... . Parks& Recreation..................................................................... PlanningHistory........................................................................ Planning Profession.................................................................... PlanningTechniques.................................................................. Safety......................................................................................... f Signs.......................................................................................... SitePlanning.............................................................................. E Small Towns & Rural Areas ........................................................ f Social Equity E StrategicPlanning....................................................................... Streets........................................................................................ E Suburbia..................................................................................... I Surveys...................................................................................... i Sustainability.............................................................................. I Tourism..................................................................................... Traffic & Transportation............................................................. ' Trees.......................................................................................... ' UrbanDesign............................................................................. ' Visioning.................................................................................... Water Resources ...................... Zoning Indexof Authors........................................................................ Indexof Titles............................................................................ Index of Non -Book Titles............................................................ Lake La Quinta 47-305 Via Ravenna - La Quints, California 92253 - (760) 564-5906 Fax (760) 564-5204 July 7, 1997 City of La Quinta Planning Commission Re: Specific Plan 97-029 After reviewing the specific plan dated June 12, 1997 for "The Centre at Lake La Quinta" and meeting with Stainko Development, it appears as if the Developer and the City have made an effort to be sensitive to the surrounding neighbors as well as the community as a whole. We: welcome; the new auto mall. I Iowever, we would like to be sure that the following conditions be made part of the approval: 1) No loading or unloading of delivery vehicles on Adams Street. 2) No employee, long teen parking or vehicle storage on Adams Street. 3) All pole light fixtures at the Adams Street wall south of 47'h Street be shielded or installed at an angle away from adjoining residences at Adams Street. 4) Any structures be no less than one hundred feet (100') from the new wall on the East side of Adams. 5) No building or site signs facing Adains Street South of'47' Street. 6) No openings to service bays facing west. 7) Business hours per the specific plan be strictly enforced. 8) New median strip on Adams to include a full leli turn from Adams to Grazianna as well as Grazianna to Adams. We trust that these items as well as those conditions already identified by the City will be made a part of the final approval. I'li-ank You, Jim La Loggia Wilma La Quinta L.P. JCis anaday Canaday Ilomes k July 8, 1997 Planning Commission City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 RE;: Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for The Centre at La Quinta project, and related matters Members of the Planning Commission: The California Environmental Quality Act, which we know as CEQA, requires each county with a population of more than 200,000 to designate one or more judges as experts, with the responsibility of becoming expert in hearing cases involving CEQA and related land use and environmental laws. That requirement is stated by Public Resources Code Section 21167.1. A judge in another county, who has heard hundreds of CEQA cases as one of those designated experts, last month wrote an article describing the procedures followed in such cases by his court. In that article, written primarily for lawyers, he also pointed out some basic concepts which have a great effect on CEQA cases. One of those concepts is "predetermination". If the men and women who lead a particular public agency decide beforehand that a certain project would be good for their community, sometimes the staff of that agency is told, directly or indirectly, just to get through the environmental review process so the project can get started. When that happens, instead of conducting the thorough review which state law requires, the public agency just goes through the motions. When a public agency has predetermined its support for a project, it often tries to speed things up. In recent years, environmental impact reports have been prepared by consultants, who are paid with money advanced by the developers of the projects. City employees, who have training and experience dealing with various environmental impacts and who have valuable knowledge about their communities over time, are almost entirely removed from the process. To your neighbors in the City of Indio, it looks like the City of La Quinta has predetermined its support of this project. A month ago, in our comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for this project, the Indio City Attorney's office named the execution of the MOU between La Quinta and the developer, Stamko, as the clearest example of this predetermination. In the Response to Comment 2, the Final EIR tries to deny, that any "official action" has been taken to approve the project. The problem is, predetermination has not been defined that narrowly and technically by the courts. Today, after further examining the Draft EIR and after consulting our city employees and other experts, we think that the evidence is overwhelming that your city has decided in advance to support this project. The rest of this written statement details some of that evidence, and it points out ways in which the EIR before you at this meeting either avoids examining certain environmental impacts, by defining them away, or strains to minimize them. THE CONSULTANT This Final EIR seems to be entirely the product of the consultant, Impact Sciences, Inc., with help from the developer, S4amko Development Co. The consultant prepared the Initial Study (which appeared late, only with the Draft EIR itself), the Draft EIR, the responses to written comments and the changes to the Draft EIR which constitute the Final EIR, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. There is little sign that the City of La Quinta staff played any part in preparing these documents, and we see no evidence that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City of La Quinta regarding the significant environmental effects of this project and related projects. Specific topics from the Environmental Impact Analysis section of the Draft EIR will be discussed below, but we think that some of the tunnel vision shown by the consultant in these documents becomes apparent if you compare the Draft EIR with the 1992 Draft EIR for the previous La Quinta Canyon Center project (State Clearinghouse No. 92032012), which is part of the administrative record here because the Draft EIR incorporated it by reference on page 1-3. The 1992 Draft EIR had its shortcomings, bull at least that consultant made some effort to acknowledge the existence of related projects (see Exhibit 3-5, Cumulative Development). This Final EIR denies the existence of related projects, several weeks after the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce stated to the City Council that "La Quinta continues to be the fastest growing city in the Coachella Valley." Your consultant's failure to consider the cumulative impact of related projects dooms this EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 97011055). In addition to listing 83 related projects within the City of La Quinta, the 1992 Draft EIR also listed 7 related projects within the City of Indian Wells, 37 related projects within the City of Rancho Mirage, 45 related projects within the City of Palm Desert, and 52 related projects within the City of Indio. Looking at this Final EIR, you would think that nothing else is happening here in the Coachella Valley. While that makes it easy to deny that constructing this project would have contribute to any cumulative impacts, it subverts the basic purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). It also makes this EIR legally inadequate. Environmental impact reports are supposed to be public disclosure documents, not masking devices. The reason why both this EIR and the 1992 Draft EIR have State Clearinghouse numbers is that both projects have the potential for causing significant effects on the environment extending beyond the City of La Quinta. Let us look at some of the significant effects which your consultant, serving the interests of this developer, has attempted to hide or deny. CULTURAL RESOURCES Unlike the 1992 Draft EIR for the La Quinta Canyon Center project, there was no scoping meeting held for this EIR. Instead, this meeting is the first public meeting at which members of the public may provide input. While your consultant's decision to bypass the public may have speeded up the process, it did a particular disservice to the local Indian tribes, who lost an opportunity to contribute their special expertise and concerns toward fashioning a mitigation program to deal with the developer's plans to work over this 87-acre piece of property with heavy machinery. Local tribes have told us that your consultant did not circulate this Draft EIR to them. Before referring to the 1992 Draft EIR's discussion of Cultural Resources, we need to recognize that, if this project is built, the remainder of this section, the area between this piece of property and Avenue 48, probably will be developed soon. In fact, you have a responsibility to inquire whether this developer has any interest in the remainder of the property and whether the City of La Quinta has received any information regarding the proposed development of the remaining land. Is there a related project that close at hand, which has not been disclosed to you? The 1992 Draft EIR stated at page 4-132 that "implementation of the proposed project has the potential to alter and destroy archaeological resources of the Desert Cahuilla and other, native peoples." For the first time, in connection with that project, archeological sites were identified on this property, by an archeologist who spent part of one week walking over its surface. He did not do any excavation testing. Still, he found prehistoric artifacts, and the 1992 Draft EIR said that it was possible that those artifacts were "indicative of larger, culturally significant deposits." It stated at page 4- 134 that construction of that project would disturb and most likely demolish the artifacts and historic resources of the Desert Cahuilla population and other native peoples." The 1992 Draft EIR also admitted that development of that project and related projects "would continue to eliminate valuable cultural resources." For that reason, the archeologist who conducted the surface examination recommended Phase II testing to determine the archeological significance of the project area and "the horizontal and vertical extent of the remains," using a variety of methods, which included test excavation units, trenches, and auguring. Most importantly, based on his findings, the 1992 Draft EIR stated at page 4-135 that the project area fits three of the defined criteria stated in Appendix K of the CEQA Guidelines, thus qualifying as an "important archeological resource. Now, in this EIR, at page 5.12-6, the consultant denies that any archeological resources meeting the criteria for significance have been identified within the project area. But, if you read the entire subconsultant's report set forth as Appendix I, you find that the few test excavation units which were dug were the smallest size (one meter squares) and went down only seven to fifteen inches. There was no trenching and no auguring. There were no units which compared with the dune -sized units reportedly investigated on nearby other properties by the Eastern Information Center at the University of California -Riverside. On page 8 of Appendix I, the subconsultant tries to explain why he failed to undertake a more complete Phase II test of this project area: "Experience at numerous nearby sites indicates there is a strong likelihood of buried sites some distance below the surface. But these buried sites could just as easily be two or three meters below the surface as one meter below." Instead, he merely suggested that the developer's grading be monitored by one archeologist. That way, buried sites would be found, perhaps, when heavy machinery plowed through them. That "monitoring" is the sole mitigation measure proposed for this project, and only for the grading for the first phase of this project. The City of Indio has a number of suggestions. First, as we stated in our comments on the Draft EIR, we believe that the Draft EIR should be revised and recirculated. The failure to identify and list related projects affects each section of the Environmental Impact Analysis, including Cultural Resources. Pages 6 and 7 of Appendix I set forth a number of important outstanding research questions regarding prehistoric native peoples which will not be answered if the destruction of cultural resources continues. Second, we believe that local tribes should have the opportunity to review and comment on the present Draft EIR, if the City of La Quinta decides not to repair the present inadequacies and recirculate the document. Third, we believe that Phase II archeological testing should be done on the entire section bounded by Highway 111, Adams Street, Avenue 48 and Dune Palms Road and that such testing should include reasonably sized excavation units and trenching. Such testing may result in additional specific mitigation measures which necessarily will precede grading of the project area. At a minimum, such complete Phase II testing reaching the six foot six inches (2 meters) to nine foot nine inches (3 meters) depths at which the consultant's own archeologist states there is a strong likelihood of finding buried sites should be done at several locations within the project area. One person cannot monitor the activities of multiple pieces of heavy machinery. PUBLIC SERVICES Here again, comparing the 1992 Draft EIR with this EIR points up the tunnel vision of disregarding related projects occurring during 1996, 1997 and 1998 in the Coachella Valley. This EIR discusses only the narrow issue of the increase in fire and police services caused by this project alone. It completely disregards the cumulative impacts of this project and related projects on those services, and it contains no mention whatsoever of education and government. However skimpy its treatment, the 1992 Draft EIR at least mentioned the latter two subjects. On page 5.10-5, the Draft EIR admits that "as the Highway 111 corridor becomes more developed, the need for additional fire stations will likely arise," but says that the site and time for a third fire station has not yet been determined. The mitigation measures listed for fire services are merely a recititation of a few existing regulations. The only ones listed for police services are design recommendations contained in a letter from the Riverside County Sheriffs Department, with the exception of the suggestions that any around -the -clock businesses (none of which are identified in the Project Description) supply security cameras, multiple employees at night, and frequent money drops. In a letter dated January 27, 1997, which appears at the beginning of Appendix C to this Draft EIR, the Desert Sands School District reported that school overcrowding is an important concern. The District's ability to meet educational needs and alleviate the overcrowding through building new schools "has been seriously impaired in recent years by local, state and federal budget cuts that have had a devastating impact on the financing of new schools," the District said. This EIR completely ignores this problem. Its conclusion to the Growth Inducement section states baldly that "the proposed project is not expected to result in growth inducing effects, except with respect to demand for goods and services required to operate and maintain the proposed mix of land use activities." At page 6-1, the 1992 Draft EIR exhibited a bit more honesty when it admitted that that project would have a multiplier effect on the local economy. This EIR attempts to claim that no increase in local population would be attributable to either the construction or the operation of this project. Throughout this EIR, and particularly in the Project Description section, the consultant postpones any discussion of the specific businesses which will constitute the second and third phases of this project. The City of Indio's Community Development Department addressed this failure in comments on pages 3-7 and 5.1-1 of the Draft EIR. The consultant instead claims that the vagueness in the project description will be remedied by further submissions to the City of La Quinta at some point in the future. The Final EIR fails to acknowledge the continuing need for governmental oversight of the second and third phases of this project. In addition, there is no discussion whatsoever of the financing mechanism of Development Agreement No. 97-002, its Exhibit C, the Developer Lease Agreement. In that novel financing mechanism, the City of La Quinta, without submitting the question to a required vote of the electorate, agrees to lease certain parts of the streets to the developer of this project for $1 and to sublease those parts of the streets back from the developer for annual payments of fifty percent of the Sales and Use Tax Revenues from businesses within the project totaling Two Million Nine Hundred and Fifty Five Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($2,,955,550), plus interest at the rate of eight and one-half percent (8.5%) per year, to repay the developer for fronting certain costs of this project. In addition to anticipated legal costs, there is no discussion of the particular need for continuing governmental involvement with this financing mechanism. The City of Indio believes that the Public Services section requires revision and recirculation. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL Here again, the consultant has misunderstood the meaning of "cumulative impacts", because on page 5.9-11 the consultant refers to cumulative impacts from this project alone. The discussion at the top of page 5.9-5 states that the two sanitary landfills identified in Figure 24 could be closed as early as the year 2002. The consultant answers the threatened unavailability of landfills for the 6.47 tons of solid waste this project is estimated to produce daily by stating in a conclusory fashion on pages 5.9-8 and 15.9-9 that it can be assumed that "market forces... will put pressure on the industry and governmental agencies to continually identify new economically feasible means of waste disposal in the future." In other words, the consultant has the City of La Quinta hoping that some answer will be found later. Meanwhile, this project's proposed mitigation monitoring program, at pages MMP-30 and MMP-31, talks only about checking waste management programs and checking hazardous waste programs. There is no mitigation proposed for the unavoidably significant environmental effects of the amount of solid waste which this project alone will generate. WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE More hope for the future is expressed by the consultant's discussion of the water requirements for this project alone. Although state law mandates a discussion of water supply and demand in this EIR, the consultant states on page 5.8-1 that the Coachella Valley Water District failed to supply information for such a discussion, in response the Notice of Preparation for the Draft EIR. Based on conversations with CVWD staff members, the consultant reports on page 5.8-2 that the current overdraft of water being pumped from underground supplies within the Coachella Valley results in 63 percent more water being withdrawn than is replaced. The CVWD staff expects the amount of overdraft to increase to 80 percent by 2015, assuming that growth continues. The EIR states on page 5.8-2 that "water shortages could occur well before the year 2015." On page 5.8-7, the consultant defines such shortages as "significant cumulative impacts"'' Clearly, it is the cumulative impact of additional water demand which is causing the overdraft situation and which threatens the shortages. The conservative estimate of 522 acre feet per year of water consumption for this project, together with the demand for water from all other related projects, will contribute to the demand imbalance. Still, as admitted on page 5.8-6, this project fails to include a water conservation program. The consultant denies any impact on water use from this project on page 5.8-8, but the EIR blames any future lack of success by CVWD "efforts to expand water supplies and increase replenishment of overdrafted aquifers" for possible future water shortages. The EIR's treatment of this issue is conclusory. It attempts to deny that the substantial amount of additional water demand from the businesses in this project will contribute to the cumulative impact of continued growth in the Coachella Valley. The City of Indio believes that this section should be revised and recirculated. The minor corrections included in the Final EIR fail the repair the inadequacy of this section. AIR QUALITY The amount of traffic which this project is expected to generate is impressive. The City of La Quinta is located within the Salton Sea Air Basin, which the Draft EIR identifies as "an area of high smog potential." On page 5.6-3, the consultant admits that the Basin is classified "as a severe non -attainment area for ozone." Because of that classification in the most stringent category, emission controls and emission reduction strategies must be imposed which will result in emission reductions of five percent or more a year. In addition to increased pollution from mobile sources, the consultant states on page 5.6-13 that harmful air emissions will be generated from stationary sources. Those sources are predicted to include automotive paint centers and dry cleaners. This EIR tries to dodge any responsibility for contributing to an unhealthy situation by stating on page 5.6-17 and at several other places that developing this project area within the density assumed in regional planning projections somehow provides immunity from the South Coast Air Quality Management District thresholds for specific emissions. On page 5.6-15, the EIR admits that this project "would generate total emissions of CO, VOC, NOx, and PM-10 which would exceed SCAQMD" thresholds, and that these impacts from the project alone would be significant. The consultant blames this entirely on traffic, but the only mitigation measure which is proposed is AQ12, which adopts the mitigation measures set forth in the Transportation and Circulation section for reducing traffic congestion through "intersection improvements". On page 5.6-26, the EIR claims that no other feasible mitigation measure exists which would reduce emissions below SCAQMD thresholds. In other words, this EIR throws up its hands and says that this project will generate a lot of traffic and a lot of harmful emissions and that there is nothing much which can be done about that. The City of Indio believes that this section should be revised and recirculated, after a specific request is made to SCAQMD staff regarding mitigation measures. A long list of potential mitigation measures was transmitted to the City of La Quinta with a letter dated March 24, 1992, and it is included in Appendix B of the 1992 Draft EIR. Here again, the consultant seems to be abdicating the responsibility of a local agency to fashion effective mitigation measures. The City of Indio believes that the failure of the City of La Quinta to deal with the cascading cumulative impacts from uncontrolled growth provides more than enough reason to disregard the statement of the project's developer that any alternatives less than total buildout as planned would fail to supply a reasonable rate of return to that developer. There are important questions of public health and safety opposed to that self -interested statement. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION The pattern of tunnel vision is continued in this section of the EIR. On page 5.5-22, the only impacts mentioned as cumulative impacts of this project involve a handful of intersections in the immediate vicinity of the project. There is no discussion of the anticipated burden on Highway 111 as it continues west into the City of Indian Wells or east into the City of Indio. There is no discussion of developing parallel streets as alternatives to Highway 111, as our Community Development Department suggested in its comments on pages 2-6 and 5.5-18 of the Draft EIR. Checking the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plans of project businesses is the only mitigation measure designed to deal with the gross amount of traffic generated by this project. The other mitigation measures deal with specific intersection improvements, with the exception of the developer's promise to consult the Sunline Transit Agency about possibly expanding bus service in the project area. Despite this, the consultant refuses to provide any estimate regarding the mix of businesses expected to participate in a TDM program, saying in the Response to Comment 12 that a precise program can be prepared only when all participating businesses are known. Such an answer indicates that the consultant and the public agency have predetermined approvals for the entire project as proposed by the developer. It suggests that no real consideration will be given to the alternatives mentioned in the EIR. It also suggests a lack of good faith in refusing to consider other methods of reducing the numbers of vehicles using the project area. The City of Indio believes that the Draft EIR should be revised to discuss other methods of reducing traffic and recirculated. In addition, any assessment of the traffic and circulation problems caused by the cumulative impact of this project and all related projects must extend to areas outside the immediate vicinity of this project. This EIR fails to mention travel between this proposed auto mail and regional commercial center and Interstate 10. POTENTIAL SECONDARY LAND USE EFFECTS The Response to Comment 26 of the Community Development Department is disingenuous. Here again, the consultant pleads ignorance on page 64 of the Final EIR, saying that no specific tenants other than the four auto dealers presently operating businesses within the City of Indio have been identified and that any attempt to identify other, secondary land use effects of this project would be speculative. The consultant and the City of La Quinta need no precise information to describe a range of possible effects on the Indio Fashion Mall, a regional commercial center located only 2.5 miles from this project area. What the consultant has done is to discuss the proposed project as a whole when it is convenient and to talk only about the first phase of the project when aspects of the second phase and third phase seem inconvenient. A public agency which attempts to present an environmental impact report adequate not only to inform decisionmakers about the significant environmental impacts of a project but also to educate the public regarding the range of possible impacts must state an accurate and consistent description of the project. This EIR, by avoiding discussion of negative aspects of the second and third phases of this project, fails to do that. A legally adequate EIR has been required by California courts to "contain sufficient detain to help ensure the integrity of the process of decisionmaking by precluding stubborn problems or serious criticism from being swept under the rug." Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (5th Dist. 1990), 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 733, 270 Cal.Rptr. 650. With respect to this EIR, serious criticism regarding the cumulative impacts of growth and stubborn problems like education, solid waste disposal, water demand and supply, air quality, and traffic have been bypassed by the developer and your consultant. The people responsible for this EIR have attempted to mislead the staff of the City of Indio, as detailed in the Community Development Department's comment letter on the Draft EIR, and to discourage the public from participating, by refusing to schedule a public scoping meeting for the EIR and by failing to circulate the Draft EIR to local Indian tribes. CONCLUSION Looking at the environmental documents at issue here, several questions come to mind: What's the rush? Why the tunnel vision? Why has the consultant strained to avoid identifying significant effects? Why won't the developer consider any alternatives to complete buildout? Above all, though, has the City of La Quinta predetermined the land use and public policy decisions which are supposed to follow the environmental review process in California, not precede it? You may have heard that our cities are opposing each other now in court. Before the City of La Quinta was forced to disclose the specifics of Development Agreement No. 97-002, the sole shareholder of the corporation which is the general partner of Stamko Development Co., the developer of this project filed a declaration. We have attached a copy of this Declaration of Christine F. Clarke to this letter, because we think that it suggests some answers to these questions. In paragraph 7, Ms. Clarke says that Stamko "already has incurred significant expenses in the initial development of the Project." It sounds like she is saying that Stamko and the City of La Quinta have a deal. Respectfully submitted, Lawt ices of R. Zaiden Corrado 21 DECLARATION OF CHRISTINE F. CLARKE 3 I, Christine F. Clarke, declare: 4 1. I am, and have been since August, 1989, the president and sole shareholder of 5, Kestam Corporation, which is the general partner of Stamko Development Co., the plaintiff 6 in this action ("Stamko"). Stamko is the owner and developer of the major new auto mall 7 and commercial center to be constructed in the southeast corner of Adams Street and 8 Highway I I I in the City of La Quinta ("La Quints"), which is the subject matter of this 9 action (the "Project"). Stamko is neither an auto dealer nor a dealership. 10 2. The Project will constitute a major regional commercial center known 11 as "The Centre at La Quinta," encompassing approximately 90 acres on the southeast corner 12 of Adams Street and Highway 111 in the City of La Quinta. Upon completion, the Project 13 will provide facilities for an auto mall with space for up to nine dealerships and a 14 commercial center consisting of approximately 400,000 square feet of retail, restaurant, 15 entertainment, office and financial space. 16 3. The Project also will provide construction of certain off -site public facilities, 17 including (i) an extension of the south side of Highway I II from Adams Street 18 approximately one-half mile east to Stamko's property line; (ii) an extension of the east side 19 of Adams Street south to Stamko's property line; and (iii) certain other intersection 20 improvements, frontage improvements and center median improvements (collectively the 21 "Public Facilities"). 22 4. On November 19, 1996, the La Quinta City Council approved and on or about 23 December 3, 1996 executed, a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") by and between 24 Stamko and La Quinta memorializing the parties' understanding regarding development of the 25 :Project. I executed the MOU on behalf of Stamko. A true and correct copy of the MOU is 26 attached hereto as Exhibit 2. (A true and correct copy is also attached as Exhibit 2 to the ' 2p7 Complaint.) TICFS OF28 USTLE & LSON. LLP NGELFS, CA 29407 3117042 1 2 3 4 51 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FFICFS OF CASTLE & )LSON, LLP 1NGS . CA 5. As part of the Development Agreement which has been negotiated by and between La Quinta and Stamko, a draft of which is available for public inspection as part of the public hearing process for such Development Agreement, Stamko will dedicate certain property to La Quinta for construction of the Public Facilities, i.e., public streets and other public infrastructure improvements. La Quinta will lease the dedicated land to Stamko, which will then construct the Public Facilities and sublease these public improvements to La Quinta. The lease payments for these Public Facilities will be paid by La Quinta from its general fund, but the amount of the quarterly lease payments will be determined by a percentage of the Project -generated sales tax revenues, up to an annual maximum amount. 6. The Project is now in the advanced stages of the development process. As noted above, a final draft of the Development Agreement for this Project has been prepared and is awaiting public hearing and approval by La Quinta. La Quinta has prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") which was circulated for public comment. The last day for submitting comments on the DEIR was June 4, 1997. To date, Stamko has completed extensive work necessary for preparation of a specific plan for the Project, and processing applications for the tentative parcel map, conditional use permit and site development permit. A copy of the Notice of Public Hearing, scheduling a public hearing on these matters for July 8, 1997 is attached hereto as Exhibit 3. 7. The planning and entitlement process for the Project is nearing completion, and Stamko already has incurred significant expenses in the initial development of the Project. In addition to the work described above, Stamko also has completed all landscape designs for the Project, including off -site public improvements and design work for many of the buildings and pads at the Project. 8. On or about May 28, 1997, I caused a Freedom of Information Request to be served on Indio, requesting all documents possessed by Indio for a development project by Pacific Indio Properties ("PIP") and RV Showcase Productions. In response to that request I :received, among other things, a copy of a Memorandum of Understanding between PIP and 29407 337042 -2- 1 2 3 4 5: 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Indio regarding development of the RV Showcase Property (the "RV Showcase MOU"). A true copy of that MOU is attached hereto as Exhibit 4. 9. Section B, Paragraph 2.4 of the RV Showcase MOU specifically provides that PIP will construct certain street improvements in connection with the RV Showcase Property and that Indio will reimburse PIP for the cost of such street improvement from a percentage of sales tax revenue generated by that project. See Exhibit 4, page 8, 12.4. 10. Attached as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of a Development Agreement between Indio, U.S. Homes, Inc. and Stamko for the development of Heritage Palms, a residential housing development by U.S. Homes on land owned by Stamko. In this Development Agreement, Indio also agreed to reimburse the developer for the cost of off -site public street improvements and other public infrastructure improvements to be constructed by U.S. Homes. 11. Stamko has not received, and will not receive, any assistance, direct or indirect or otherwise, from the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency regarding this Project. 12. The facts stated by me in this declaration are known to me to be true of my own, personal knowledge. If called as a witness, I could and would competently testify to the facts set forth in this declaration. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this Declaration was executed this _th day of June, 1997 at Los Angeles, California. 4z - - I CHRISTINE F. LARKE 25 26 27 28 ,FFICES OF CASTLE & )LSON, LLP ANGEL . CA 28407.337042 -3- aa� -?I� (7 �7,0r-2 ECOVE � JUL 0 81997 PETITION CITY OF LAQUINTA T - PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL RE PROPOSED AUTO MALL THE UNDERSIGNED HOMEOWNERS OF LAKE LA QUINTA ARE NOT OPPOSED TO THE AUTO MALL PER SE IF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS CAN AND WILL BE MET IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE RESIDENTIAL INTEGRITY AND SERENITY OF OUR AREA. INASMUCH AS THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY ARE COMING TO THE CITY FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, THE CITY MAY IMPOSE THESE CONDITIONS: 1. All auto body repairs, painting, etc., shall be located at the east end of the auto mall; 2. No loading, unloading or storing of vehicles on Adams Street; 3. Owners shall install landscape lighting along Adams Street; 4. No loudspeakers shall be used to page personnel; 5. The perimeter streets surrounding Lake La Quinta shall not be used to test run the dealers' vehicles, especially to test brakes; 6. Speed limit signs of 25 miles per hour shall be posted along Adams Street, Avenue 48; Avenue 47; and Caleo Bay. STAmCo RN.d/oA 7.AOwners shall install 8' high solid cement wall on top of a 3' berm or a 12' high cement wall at sidewalk level along Adams Street. Signature i 2._ 3._� n4.Z 5J 6.� 7._ 8._ 9._ 10. 11. 12. 13z 14` 15. 16., 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22, 23. 24. 25., 26. 27. 281 30, 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. w C-1 ' l , -/. Q 4. 77/-,Z Y 65. 66.. 6-7. 68.' 69.. V 70. 71.1 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. T4hf 4 4 09ba MEMORANDUM TO: CommunitEsDirector/City velopment Department FROM: Chris Public Engineer DATE: July 8, 1997 SUBJECT: Specific Plan 97-029 - Auto Mall and Commercial Center The Public Works Department's original review of, and recommended conditions of approval for, the subject document were based on a late -stage draft which has since been revised. The Department recommends the following modifications to the conditions of approval to adapt them to the Specific Plan document to be presented for Planning Commission consideration. The condition numbers used here coincide with those shown in the Planning Commission packet. 7. Section 1.20.2 12 - Delete the portion of the condition following "traffic signal. 8. Section 2.10.3 - Delete the words "public sidewalks." 9. Section 2.20.2, 11 - Revise the page number to 14. Replace "(half street)" with "the first parenthesized statement." 10. Section 2.30.4 - Revise the page number to 19. 11. Section 2.60.1 - Revise page number to 37. Delete the first sentence. 12. Section 2.60.2 12 - Revise page number to 37. 13. Section 2.60.4.3 13 - Delete this condition. 14. (Exhibit 11) - Delete this condition. 15. (Exhibits 13 - 16) - Delete the words "sidewalks or." FB/fb FAPROJDEV\SP\97029.MEM Printed July 8, 1997 Page 1 of T4t�t °f XP Q" MEMORANDUM TO: Community De elopment Department FROM: Chris Vo t Public Works Director/City Engineer DATE: July 8, 1997 SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map 28525 The Public Works Department recommends the following revisions to the conditions of approval presented for Planning Commission consideration. The revisions will adapt the conditions to the current Development Agreement for the proposed auto mall and commercial/retail center: C ftimi No. 23: Delete this condition. Condition No. 45: Replace the last sentence of subparagraph A-2) with the following: "Construct traffic signal at Avenue 47. Modify traffic signal at Highway 111 as required by the improvements associated with this development." Wherever convenient: Add the following condition: "In the event of a con—INIct between the conditions listed herein and the provisions of the Development Agreement between the applicant and the {City, the provisions of the Development Agreement shall prevail unless ,such action or interpretation would result in violation of any applicable (local, state or federal law." FB/fb F:\PR0JDEV\SP\97029.MEM Printed July 8, 1997 Page 1 of