The URL can be used to link to this page

1995 03 28 PCPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California March 28, 1995 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. MAY BE CONTINUED TO TiiE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING Beginning Resolution 95-005 Beginning Minute Motion 95-015 CALL TO ORDER - Flag Salute ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for citizens to address the Planning Commission on matters relating to City planning and zoning which are not Agenda items. When addressing the Planning Commission, please state your name and address. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Item ............. STREET NAME CHANGE 95-006 Applicant ...... La Quinta Volunteer Fire Department Location ....... Old 52nd Avenue from Avenida Bermudas to its easterly terminus Request......... Adoption of Notice of Intention to hold a Public Hearing on Ap 11 11, 1995, to consider a request to change the name of Old 52nd Avenue to Francis Hack Lane Action ......... Resolution 95- PC/AGENDA 2. Item ............... GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-048 Applicant ......... City of La Quinta Location .......... Portions of Sections 28, 29, 32, and 33 of Township 6 South, Range 7 East, S.B.B.M. Request ........... Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Approval of a General Plan Amendment for the Jefferson Street Alignment Action ............ Resolution 95- 3. Item ............... SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 -- GREEN SPECIFIC PLAN Applicant ........ Winchester Asset Management Location ......... Within Section 29, Township 6 South, Range 7 East; adjacent to The Quarry and approximately 1/2 mile south of PGA West Request .......... 1. Certification of an Initial Study and Environmental Impact Report. 2. Approval of a General Plan Amendment from Open Space to Open Space, Very Low Density Residential, Medium Low Density. Residential, and Density Residential. 3. Approval of a Change of Zone from Hillside Conservation (H-C) to Single Family Residential (R-1), Multiple Family Residential (R-2), and Hillside Conservation (H-C) Action .......... Resolution 95- , Resolution 95- , Resolution 95- Resolution 95- Item ............. SPECIFIC PLAN 94-026 - TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 94-049 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - EA 94-287 Applicant ....... Travertine Corporation Location ........ Portions of Section 3, 4,5, and 33, Township 5 and 6 South, Range 7 East Request ......... 1. Certification of an Initial Study and Environmental Impact Report 2. Approval of a General Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Golf Course Open Space (G), Low Density Residential (LDR), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), and Tourist Commercial (TC). 3. Approval of a Specific Plan for 2,300 resort homes, two golf courses, resort hotel and commercial on 909.2 acres. Action ........... Resolution 95- , Resolution 95- , Resolution 95- BUSINESS ITEMS: - None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of March 14, 1995. COMMISSIONER ITEMS. Commissioner report of City Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT PC/AGENDA STUDY SESSION Tuesday, March 28, 1995 Study Session Room 3:00 P.M. 1. All agenda items PC/AGENDA PH # 1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MARCH 28, 1995 CASE NO.: STREET NAME CHANGE 95-006 REQUEST: ADOPTION OF NOTICE OF INTENTION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL 11, 1995, TO CONSIDER A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE NAME OF OLD AVENUE 52 TO FRANCIS HACK LANE APPLICANT: LA QUINTA VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT (C/O BRUCE PELI.ETIER) LOCATION: OLD AVENUE 52 FROM AVENIDA BERMUDAS TO ITS EASTERLY TERMINUS BACKGROUND: On March 9, 1995, a request was received from the La Quinta Volunteer Fire Department requesting that the City consider renaming Old Avenue 52 to Francis Hack Lane (Attachment 1). The volunteer personnel for the City feel that it would be appropriate to rename the street in her honor since she has donated money to help the Fire Department in past years. She has also helped the City's Parks and Recreation Department. The existing name needs to be changed since Avenue 52 has been relocated to the north. Staff Comments Pursuant to Chapter 14.08 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission shall adopt a resolution of intention to change a street name based on an applicant's petition. The resolution shall set the date and time for the public hearing. Staff recommends that the public hearing be held on April 11, 1995. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 95-_, setting April 11, 1995, as the date to hold a public hearing for Street Name Change 95-006 (Old Avenue 52 to Francis Hack Lane). Attachments: 1. Letter from applicant 2. Draft Resolution PCGT.110 March 10, 1995 Planning Commission City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Commissioners: This letter is from the La Quinta Volunteer Fire Department requesting that the old Avenue 52 be renamed to Francis Hack Lane in the name of Francis Hack. Francis was a long time resident that helped many programs in La Quinta. She has donated many dollars to help the L.Q.V.F.C.. progress into having equipment that would make any full time fire department envious. She has truly helped save lives in La Quinta. She has also donated many pieces of play equipment to olar parks and has sponsored numerous youth programs. When I started getting some information on Francis, everyone I talked to said one thing about Francis Hack. If someone or any organization needed help, there was nothing she wouldn't do to help. Sincerely, Bruce Pelletier Engineer bphackln PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RE;SOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CHANGE THE STREET NAME OF OLD AVENUE 52 T01 FRANCIS HACK LANE BETWEEN AVENIDA BERMUDAS AND ITS EASTERLY TERMINUS AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE TO HEAR ALL PERSONS INTERESTED OR OBJECTING TO THE PROPOSED STREET NAME CHANGE, PROVIDING POSTING, ETC. PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 14.08 OF THE I -A QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE CASE NO.: STREET NAME CHANGE 95-006 APPLICANT: LA QUINTA VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT C/O BRUCE PELLETIER NOV I, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That pursuant to Chapter 14.08 of the Municipal Code et. seq., the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta declares its intention to change the street name of Old Avenue 52 to Francis Hack Lane as described on attached Exhibit "All SECTION 2. That a hearing is to be conducted on the Ilth day of April, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. at the La Quinta City Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, at which time all persons interested in or objecting to the proposed street name change will be heard. SECTION 3. The Community Development Department Secretary shall cause this resolution to be posted within 72-hours after its adoption in four (4) public places. Those places shall be: City Hall, the La Quinta Library, the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce, and the La Quinta Post Office. SECTION 4. Public notices shall be mailed to all property owners within 300-feet of the subject street ten days prior to the hearing. SECTION 5. The adopted Resolution shall be published in the Desert Sun newspaper a minimum of 10-days prior to the April 11th public hearing. RESOPCI14 SECTION 6. Posting of the adopted Resolution along the length of the affected street shall be completed at least ten days prior to the hearing date. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this, the 28th day of March, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.114 � y,,. - ICAILE a oc W W at H s SINA&A cc -off JA > u i < Q (. E D Oran 0 0 � z �WOJA z > CA U > a o k CA LE a v EN EN 04 <im ® < Q p p cr. a W W ALES Z . d e O W < W W a O Cm mu " A iO3 CA LE 90 MONT E > Z °L o a •= CA LE i a C awe fi CA LLI N v > IRJSA F 0 o o i I _ Z CALLS C Ill N i W a W < Q W CA LE MAO 10 Q h W Z CALLF TEMECU > o < O < _ W z Z '" CJ LLE < THE O < CASE MAP CASE Na. Street Name Change 95-006 Existing Name - Old Avenue 52 Proposed Name - Francis Hack Lane 4v n i a 'ark Fire St. nnnnn�nnnn )1d Avenue 52 i SCALE: nts Exhibit "A" JL qt PH #'2 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: MARCH 28, 1995 CASE NO: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-048 REQUEST: CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE JEFFERSON STREET ALIGNMENT APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA REPRESENTATIVE/ ENGINEER: THE KEITH COMPANIES LOCATION: PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 28, 29, 32, AND 33 OF TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SBBM. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING: UNDESIGNATED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPOSED: PRIMARY ARTERIAL (100-FOOT ROW) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-293 FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT UPON THE ENVIRONMENT IF MITIGATION MEASURES ARE NOT IMPLEMENTED. THEREFORE, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED. BACKGROUND: With the development of The Quarry project, the alignment of Jefferson Street from Avenue 58, south to Avenue 62 became an issue at the forefront of future development in that area. The Quarry project was conditioned to pay for an alignment study to resolve issues relating to the extension of Jefferson Street right-of-way. A contract for such a study was awarded to The Keith Companies (TKC) in September, 1993. The study identified a new alignment for the street (Attachment 1). On November 15, 1994, the City Council directed staff to proceed with the environmental assessment of the proposed alignment. An initial study was prepared for the alignment, in which mitigation measures are proposed that will mitigate any potential significant adverse impacts to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, a mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact has been prepared for certification. The specific alignment recommended in the study attempts to balance constructability with the interests of affected property owners, public agencies, and wilderness/wildlife proponents. The only known outstanding :issue at this point is the consent of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The BLM owns property traversed by the proposed alignment. That agency will not comment on the specific alignment, or consider providing the needed right-of-way, until the City submits an application for right-of-way with the BLM. The application must be accompanied by an environmental study prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) covering the BLM property. The City is not prepared to undertake such a study at this time. The eventual position of the BLM could result in one of three following outcomes: Approval of the roadway on the specific alignment recommended by the study. * A minor shift of the alignment to traverse a smaller corner of the BLM property, or * A significant shift of the alignment out of BLM jurisdiction. This option would present physical (geologic) barriers to construction and is not considered feasible. It would result in a non-continous arterial street with Jefferson Street deadending at two locations in some fashion in residential neighborhoods located adjacent to the BLM property. At the November 15, 1994, Council meeting, Engineering staff stated that the proposed alignment represents the beast consensus alternative for re -aligning Jefferson Street. It was also noted that the proposed alignment may conflict with the Bureau of Reclamation's plans for constructing ground water recharging basins in the area. However, the Bureau of Reclamation (BR) and the Coachella Valley Water District have since determined the proposed alignment will have no adverse impact on their plans regarding ground water recharge facilities. STAFF CONCLUSION: The street alignment shown in the Study documents represents the best consensus alternative for realigning Jefferson Street within the stated limits. Except for a 3,500-foot long segment that passes through the BLM property, the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this street alignment properly addresses the environmental issues on all land except for land owned by the United States Government. The proposed street alignment is the alignment desired by landowners in the immediate area and provides a looped right of way network in this part of the City that works well for utilities, public safety and transportation. It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the alignment as the City's preferred alignment and direct staff to proceed with the necessary steps to obtain clearance from the BLM for the 3,500-foot long street segment that crosses its land. The Travertine Specific Plan has been conditioned to pay for the environmental documentation that is necessary to obtain the BLM clearance. RECOMMENDATION: That the La Quinta Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95- , recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 95-048, as proposed. Attachments: 1. Map of Jefferson Street Alignment Study Area 2. Project Report - Jefferson Street Alignment Study (Volume I) 3. Appendices - Jefferson Street Alignment Study (Volume II) 4. Environmental Assessment Resolution 5. General Plan Amendment Resolution ATTACHMENT #4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-293, PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-048 (JEFFERSON STREET ALIGNMENT) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-293 CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 28th day of March, 1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment 95-048; and, WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended) (Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared Initial Study EA 95-293; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said General Plan Amendment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that a Negative Declaration of environmental impact should be .filed; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts;, findings, and reasons to justify recommendation for certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed General Plan amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either directly or indirectly. 2. The proposed General Plan amendment will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. RESOPC113 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable. NOV I, 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 for this environmental assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend certification of Environmental Assessment 95-293 for the reasons set forth in this resolution and as stated in the attached environmental assessment checklist and addendum, labeled Exhibit "A". PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 28th day of March, 1995, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DON ADOLPH, Chairman City of La Quinta, California JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.113 ATTACHMENT #5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-048 (JEFFERSON STREET ALIGNMENT) CASE NO. GPA 95-048 - CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28th day of March, 1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request for a General Plan Amendment from undesignated street right-of-way designation to Primary Arterial street with an 100-foot right-of-way, on 42.5 acres generally located on Jefferson Street extension, between 58th Avenue and 62nd Avenue alignment, more particularly described as: A PORTIOI\ OF SECTIONS 28, 29, 32 AND 33 OF TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, S.B.B.M WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment 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 Department has completed a Negative Declaration, which has been reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta. 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. 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment, as requested, is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment designation will provide an applicable land use designation for the right-of-way. 3. The proposed land use designation is consistent and compatible with surrounding development and planned development 4. Approval of this proposal will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment due to mitigation measures contained in the Negative Declaration which will be incorporated into the approval of General Plan Amendment 95-048. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: R1 isOCC.108 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- 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 certification by separate resolution of the Negative Declaration for this Amendment by the La Quints City Council. 3. That it does hereby recommend City Council approval of the above described General Plan Amendment 95-048 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 28th day of March, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RISOCC.Ios PH #3 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: MARCH 28, 1995 CASE NO: SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 - GREEN SPECIFIC PLAN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 94-047 CHANGE OF ZONE 94-077 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - EA 94-287 REQUEST: CERTIFICATION OF AN INITIAL STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT. APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM OPEN SPACE TO OPEN SPACE, VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM HILLSIDE CONSERVATION (H-C) TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1), MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-2), AND HILLSIDE CONSERVATION (H-C). APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC PLAN FOR 277 RESORT HOMES ON 331.1 ACRES APPLICANT: WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROPERTY OWNER: JOHN GREEN REPRESENTATIVE/ ENGINEER: THE KEITH COMPANIES LOCATION: WITHIN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST; ADJACENT TO THE QUARRY AND APPROXIMATELY 1/2 MILE SOUTH OF PGA WEST. ZONING: EXISTING: HILLSIDE CONSERVATION (H-C) PROPOSED: ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R- 2) HILLSIDE CONSERVATION (H-C) PCLC.101 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING: OPEN SPACE (OS - 1 DU/10 AC) PROPOSED: VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (VLDR - 0 TO 2 DA/AC) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR - 2 TO 4 DU/AC) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR - 4 TO 8 DU/AC) OPEN SPACE (OS - 1 DU/ 10 AC) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 94-287 FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. THEREFORE, AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT HAS BEEN PREPARED. BACKGROUND: On October 17, 1994 the Applicant's representative submitted an application for Specific Plan 94-025, General Plan Amendment 94-047, and Change of Zone 94-077 to the Community Development Department. A Notice of Preparation was prepared for the Specific Plan to solicit comments on the suggested scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to be prepared for the project. An EIR was prepared in conjunction with another proposed specific plan that neighbors the Green project:. The Draft EIR was submitted to staff on January 18, 1995. The document was distributed on January 18, 1995, for the required 45 day comment period, which ended on March 4, 1995. On January 19, 1995, the City' s Historic Preservation Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the archaeological report prepared for the Green Specific Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION REQUIItEMENTS: Pursuant to provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines 15090) the lead agency is required to certify Final EIR' s as being completed in compliance with CEQA, and that the decision making body of the lead agency did review and consider the information contained in the Final EIR, prior to approving or taking action on the project. Because the Planning Commission is an advisory body and is required to make a recommendation on the project itself, it is considered appropriate for the Commission to also make a recommendation to the City Council on certification of the Final EIR. This section is intended to give a brief summary to the Planning Commission on the pertinent EIR information which should be considered. PCLC.101 Environmental Impact Report An Initial Study Environmental Assessment (EA 94-287) was prepared for the project, in conjunction with the proposed Travertine project, by The Keith Companies (TKC), in October of 1994. The Initial Study, along with the Notice of Preparation, was transmitted to 33 agencies or special interest groups for review and comment. In addition, the document was transmitted to all City departments, including the Riverside County Fire Department and the Sheriff's Department. A 30-day comment period was provided. Responses were received from the following: Imperial Irrigation District Coachella Walley Water District State Fish & Game State Historic. Preservation Officer Bureau of Land Management Desert Riders George Meyer, Professor of Geology -College of the Desert Coachella Walley Mountains Conservancy La Quinta Chamber of Commerce City Departments The initial study prepared for this project identified general impacts which were not considered significantly adverse to the extent of requiring mitigation beyond applicable permitting requirements. Impacts to population, housing, energy, risk of upset, and health were considered insignificant. The Initial Study determined that the proposed Green Specific Plan may have a significant effect on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Report was required for the project. The Initial Study identified potential or definite significant impacts in the following areas: Earth - geology, grading, erosion, geologic hazards Air - air quality, odors Water - drainage, flood hazard, quality Biological Resources - diversity, endangered species, habitat Noise - increase Light and Glare - new sources Land Use - alteration of existing use Natural Resources - rate of use Transportation/Circulation - movement, parking, impacts, patterns, hazards Public Services - fire, police, schools, parks & recreation, maintenance & roads Utilities - water Aesthetics - scenic vistas Recreation - quantity Cultural Resources - prehistoric archaeological resources PCLC.101 Findings of fact based on these impacts will be prepared for the City Council' s consideration when the project is presented to them for approval. Although there is no requirement in CEQA that the Planning Commission adopt these findings, there should be evidence in the record that the Planning Commission has considered the information. The City Council must adopt these findings upon certification of the Final EIR. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE AWACTS: In conjunction with making the findings discussed above, the lead agency can not approve a project, for which and EIR has been prepared, unless it has been determined that any remaining significant adverse effects found to be unavoidable, as set forth in the findings required under CEQA Section 15091, are acceptable due to overriding concerns. For this project, the Final EIR indicates that impacts to land use, air quality, water, biology, and public services and utilities will remain significant even with proposed mitigation measures being implemented. CEQA Section 15093 allows a lead agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether or not to approve the project. If the benefits outweigh the environmental risks, then the adverse effect may be deemed "acceptable". If the lead agency finds this to be the case, it must state, in writing, the specific reasons to support its position based upon the Final EIR and/or any other information in the record. This is called a Statement of Overriding Considerations for review by the City Council at the time the project is to be approved. Although the Planning Commission need not adopt such a statement, it is important that the Commission be aware of this necessity and acknowledge this to the City Council in their recommendation. The City Council can certify the Final EIR with or without approving the project. Staff recommends that the following findings be made regarding the Final EIR: 1. The Final EIR prepared for Specific Plan 94-025 and its related applications has been completed in compliance with CEQA. 2. The Final EIR for Specific Plan 94-025 and its related applications was presented to the Planning Commission by the lead agency and that said Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to recommending approval of the project. 3. That there are significant environmental effects which can be reasonably mitigated if the proposed project is implemented and that findings as required under Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code can be and shall be made by the lead agency. 4. That the identified significant impacts cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance based upon information in the Final EIR, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations shall be adopted to that effect. PCLC.101 A Draft EIR was prepared b;y TKC for review and comment. The draft document was circulated according to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The comment period ended March 4, 1995. A Notice of Availability was published in the Desert Sun Newspaper on February 7;, 1995. The draft EIR was transmitted to those on the list in Attachment 9. Comments on the DEIR were received from the following entities: Southern California Gas Company Riverside County Sheriff's Department Professor George Meyer, College of the Desert State Fish & Game State Historic Preservation Office Call Trans Imperial Irrigation District Regional Water Quality Control Board Coachella Valley Water District Bureau of Land Management Office of Planning At Research La Quinta Public Works Department Copies of these letters and the responses to the comment letters are found in the Final EIR. General Plan Amendment In order to permit the development of residential units at a density of more than 1 unit per 10 acres, a general plan amendment is necessary to redesignate 99.9 acres to residential land use designations. Specifically, 1.2.5 acres are proposed to be Very Low Density Residential at 1.0 units per acre, 14.1 acres as Low Density Residential at 3.0 units per acre, and 87.5 acres to Medium Density Residential at 4.0 units per acre. A total of 5.8 acres will be dedicated to the realignment of Jefferson Street which will pass through the project near the eastern boundary. Change of Zone Corresponding to the proposed General Plan Amendment, a Change of Zone is required to make the permitted uses consistent with the proposed land use designations. Currently, the entire parcel is zoned Hillside Conservation (H-C). The Applicant has requested a change for that portion of the property proposed for residential development. The recommended new zones are One Family Residential (R-1), Multiple Family Residential (R-2), and other designations as appropriate, with the open space areas to remain with the Hillside Conservation (H-C) designation. Specific Plan The proposed development consists of single family detached homes on Cove lots, Estate lots, and Custom lots on 99.9 acres. The total project site encompasses 331.1 acres; of this, 231.2 acres in the central and western portion of the property will remain open space. Residential development will be clustered in the eastern section with 10 custom home sites near the northwestern corner of the property. A conservation easement will be required for all open space areas that are 20 % or more in slope, in order to preserve the hillsides. PCLC.101 The Boo Hoff Trail transects the property and will be relocated prior to development of the project. The trail is to be; relocated along the foothills. In addition, a multipurpose trail easement will be contained within the Jefferson Street alignment. The proposed project averages a residential density of 0.8 units per gross acre. The residential development comprises 28 %) of the parcel, and results in a net density of 2.4 units per acre on the developed portion of the site. Most of this development will occur in the eastern portion of the site on both sides of the; currently proposed Jefferson Street alignment. Ten custom home sites are proposed in the northwestern corner of the site. These lots will be accessed through The Quarry development. There are no proposed recreational facilities with this project. However, tennis courts, pools, and clubhouses would be permitted uses. Access to the project will be from Jefferson Street. The currently proposed alignment will traverse the eastern portion. of the site as indicated in the Circulation plan contained in the Specific Plan. Three entries into the project, off of Jefferson Street, are proposed. A series of residential streets will serve the project internally. Utilities will need to be extended to the project. All utility purveyors have indicated the willingness and/or the capacity to serve the project providing line expansions and needed facilities, such as substations, are constructed. The recommended Conditions of Approval cite specific requirements for utility service expansion. The proposed project will be developed in three phases, the first being the ten custom lots accessed through The Quarry. Phases II and III comprise the eastern portion of the project. If the alignment for Jefferson Street should require some revision, then so to will this portion of the Green project. Public Comment: Staff has received several telephone inquiries about the project. No letters of support or opposition to the Green Specific Plan have been received by the general public, as of March 23, 1995. Responsible agency comments have been previously discussed, and are attached to this report. STAFF CONCLUSION The staff of the Community Development Department has reviewed and commented on this project. There are no concerns in regards to the planned design of the project, except that the possibility of a necessary revision in the alignment of Jefferson Street may necessitate minor revision in the design of the proposed lots. The environmental issues and their associated mitigation measures discussed in the project EIR are acceptable to staff. Therefore, staff forwards a recommendation for approval of the project to the Planning Commission. rci.c.ioi RECONMEENDATION: 1. That the La Quinta Planning Commission, adopt Resolution 95-_, recommending to the City Council certification of the Final EIR for Specific Plan 94-025, in accordance with the findings set forth. in this staff report. 2. That the La Quinta Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95-_, recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 94-047, as proposed. 3. That the La Quinta Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Change of Zone 94-077, as proposed. 4. That the La Quinta Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 94-025, as proposed, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. EIR (book) 2. General Plan Amendment Exhibit 3. Change of Zone Exhibit 4. Specific Plan (book) 5. EIR Resolution with. Exhibits A, B, C (D & E not included) 6. General Plan Amendment Resolution 7. Change of Zone Resolution 8. Specific Plan Resolution with Conditions of Approval 9. EIR Distribution list PCLC.101 ATTACHMENT #2 �a 9� �o 2 It mod ewA so .269 CASE MAP CASE Na. cEMnAL PLAN ArInv-Dr=I 94-047 WINCHESTER DDVE OPI�ENT COMPANY ' NORTH SCALE: ATTACHMENT #3 CASE MAP CASE N" CHMCM OF ZONE 94-077 1,Mq : MSTER DE'VEMPrIENT C aMPAANY SCALE ATTACHMENT #5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 AS BEING ADEQUATE AND COMPLETE; RECOGNIZING THE OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS TO CERTAIN ADVERSE IMPACTS; AND RECOGNIZING THE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED, BUT WHICH CAN BE REASONABLY MITIGATED, IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 - WINCHESTER ASSET MANAGEMENT (GREEN) WHEREAS, Winchester Asset Management has proposed a Specific Plan on 331.0 acres, consisting of 277 resort dwelling units on 94 acres, and 231.2 acres of open space; and, WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (hereinafter "EIR") has been prepared and circulated, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970; and, WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California and the City of La Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (hereinafter CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq. that the City shall not approve a project unless there is no feasible way to lessen or avoid significant effects; meaning all impacts have been avoided to the extent feasible or substantially lessened and any remaining unavoidable significant impacts are acceptable based on CEQA, Section 15093; and, WHEREAS, it 'is the policy of the State of California and the City of La Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq. and the State Guidelines for implementation of CEQA, as amended (California Administrative Code, Section 15000 et seq.), that the City shall balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks prior to project approval; meaning that if the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered acceptable; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta has read and considered all environmental documentation comprising the EK has found that the ED3 considers all potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, is complete and adequate, and fully compiles with all requirements of CEQA, the State Guidelines for implementation; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered certain overriding considerations to adverse impacts, the CEQA Findings and Statements of Facts; and, RESOPC.146 Planning Commission Resolution 95-_ WHEREAS, prior to action on the project, the Planning Commission has considered all significant impacts, mitigation measures, and project alternatives identified in the EIR, has found that all potentially significant impacts on the project have been lessened or avoided to the extent feasible; and, WHEREAS, Section 15093(b) requires, where the recommendation of the Planning Commission allows the occurrences of significant effects which are identified in the FEIR but are not adequately mitigated, the City must state in writing the reasons to support its action based on the FEIR and/or other information in the record; and, WHEREAS, CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines provide 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 effects of the project unless the public agency makes written findings for each of the significant effects, accompanied by a statement of facts supporting each finding. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of the FEIR for Specific Plan 94-025 as adequate and complete. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, in addition to findings made in the body of the Final EIR, recommends to the City Council that the Statements of Overriding Considerations as shown on attached Exhibit "A" entitled "Statement of Overriding Considerations", which is incorporated herein as though set forth at length. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, recommends to the City Council adoption of the CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts as shown on attached Exhibit "B" entitled "CEQA Findings and Statement of Fact", which is incorporated herein as though set forth at length. APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 28th day of March,1995. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RESOPC.146 Planning Commission Resolution 95-_ DON ADOLPH, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY BERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.146 Green EXHIBIT "A" STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. Implementation of the project will indirectly result in the elimination of the negative impacts associated with vacant property in favor of a quality housing development. 2. The proposed project is necessary to enhance the quality of life in the project area sought as essential and beneficial in attracting new residents, business, and visitors to La Q,uinta, and generally promoting increased investment and return on property values. 3. Impacts identified as significant from project implementation are generally associated with normal growth, progress, and prosperity. 4. The project will be instrumental in causing new area -wide public facilities to be constructed, which will benefit both existing development and other future adjacent development. 5. Specific plan project implementation will ultimately create new jobs for facilities construction, future development construction, the provision of public services for a larger population base, and to staff new business and operations associated with the specific plan. 6. Improvements to local roadways will occur that will increase vehicular efficiency and local access. 7. The City's economic base will be enhanced through revenues derived from increased sales, taxes, business licenses, and other fees, taxes, and exactions from new development. 8. The proposed project is more restrictive in its development density than what would have been permitted when the project site was under County jurisdiction. DOCLC.050 GREEN EXHIBIT 'B" CEQA FIINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS BACKGROUND 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: 1. 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 15091) of the Guidelines). Because the proposed Specific Plan 94-025 constitutes s project under CEQA and the Guidelines, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta has required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This EIR has identified certain significant effects which may occur as a result of the project, or on a cumulative basis in conjunction with is project and other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Further, the Planning Commission recommends approval of this project and, after determining that the EIR Is complete and has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the Guidelines, the findings set forth herein are made: EFFECTS DETERENED TO BE INSIGNIFICANT Through preparation of the Initial Study (Environmental Checklist form), the City identified that implementation of the project would not have any significant adverse impacts on human health. This conclusion is based on the following: Human Health: The project proposes the development of residential units and open space. Earth There are no unique geologic or physical features on the areas to be developed. The project is not near a river or stream or other body of water. The project will not alter the climate, either locally or regionally. DOCLC.014 GREEN Water There are no bodies of water on the site. The project will not alter the direction or rate of flow of ground waters. There will not be a substantial reduction in public water supplies. Flooding hazards are not anticipated for the project area. Biological Resources There will be no reduction in agricultural lands. Noise People will not be exposed to severe noise levels. Risk of Upset The risk of explosion or release of a hazardous substance is not anticipated by this residential development. Population The Green project will not alter the existing human population in the area. Housinir The project will not effect existing housing as the site is vacant. Transportation/ Circulation The project will have no effect on water -borne rail or air traffic as there is none on the site. Public Services There are no unanticipated impacts upon undesignated governmental services by this residential project. EneW The project will not require the consumption of substantial amounts of fuel or energy for either construction or on -going operation. There will not be a substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy. Cultural Resources There 'were no cultural resources observed on the project site during the archaeological survey of the property. DOCLC.014 EXHIBIT "C" SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED LAND USE: The Green Specific Plan proposes land uses that will require the following General Plan designation: Very Low Density Residential, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Open Space. This project would not be consistent with the existing Open Space land use designation or the existing H-C (Hillside Conservation) zoning designation of 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres. This is considered a significant impact. The project proposes 277 resort single family homes on 94.1 acres, with densities ranging from 1.0 to 4.0 per acre. The Green project will result in a significant cumulative land use impact as the projects do not meet all of the goals and policies of the General Plan. Findin s: 1. The proposed project is not consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan for the City of La Quinta. 2. The required general plan amendment will mitigate land use inconsistencies. 3. The conversion of open space to urban uses will remain a significant impact. 4. The unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against the facts set forth on the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. AIR QUALITY: The primary impacts to air quality associated with the Green project implementation will occur from vehicular -related emissions. Indirect impacts will occur from stationary sources, including increased electrical demand requiring combustion in power plants. The project air quality analysis indicates that the thresholds for NO2 and PM10 will be exceeded during the construction phases of the project and is therefore significant. Findings: 1. The proposed project will result in significant short term impacts to air quality. 2. Mitigation measures have been required for the project which will partially mitigate to the extent feasible the significant impacts. DOCLC.O48 3. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. WATER RESOURCES: The proposed Green Specific Plan will contribute to cumulative impacts which remain significant after project -specific mitigation. The impacts to the groundwater supply due to the overdraft state of the lower aquifer is considered significant. Potential groundwater degradation could occur due to the creation of new wells drilled through non -potable water sources, urban runoff, and pesticides and fertilizers applied to landscape areas. This is considered a significant impact. Cumulative impacts to which this project will contribute to will result in reductions in the existing underground water supply which is currently in a state of overdraft, and will require further dependence on out-of-state water supplies with the addition of the Green Specific Plan. Impacts to the water supply of the Coachella Valley are considered cumulatively significant. Findings: 1. The proposed project will result in cumulative water impacts on the water supply in the Coachella Valley. 2. Cumulative impacts remain significant due to the Coachella Valley's dry climate, exhaustible water supply, and increased dependency on imported water. 3. Potentially significant site disturbance impacts remain due to the unknown off site well and reservoir locations required by the proposed project. 4. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. BIOLOGY: The Green project would develop approximately 100 acres of the total 331-acre site. The loss of 100 acres of natural habitat in the Coachella Valley is considered significant. Specific impacts to individual sensitive species including the removal of barrel cactus are considered significant. This project would eliminate habitat for on -site wildlife species, which are not considered sensitive species. However, this is considered a significant impact. The sensitive wildlife species on the Green site would be lost. The project would cause stress and disturbance to off -site bighorn sheep as a result of site preparation, construction„ light, glare, noise, hikers, and domestic animals. This is considered a significant impact. No impacts to the desert tortoise would result from development on the Green site, since no evidence of the species could be found on the project site. Sensitive bat species are considered likely to occupy rock overhangs or crevices on the hills and forage within the project site. This is a significant impact. DOCLC.048 The proposed project has the potential to impact the blueline stream course on -site due to construction activities. This is a significant impact. The incremental loss of Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub and Desert Dry Woodland plant and animal communities within the Coachella Valley are considered cumulatively significant and unavoidable. Findin s: 1. The taking of sensitive plants is reduced by mitigation but remain significant after mitigation. 2. The loss of natural habitat on -site is considered significant and unavoidable impact. 3. Impacts to sensitive wildlife species present on -site have been reduced but remain significant after mitigation. 4. Impacts to sensitive bat species can be lessened by implementation of the Habitat Conservation Plan but remains significant after mitigation. 5. The incremental loss of natural habitat remains cumulatively significant and unavoidable. 6. The incremental loss of the Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub and Desert Dry Woodland plant and animal communities within the Coachella Valley are considered cumulatively significant and unavoidable. 7. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES: Schools: The Green Specific Plan will have a significant impact upon the local schools. Students generated by the proposed project will add to the existing and anticipated overcrowded conditions at the schools that will serve the site. Additional travel -related costs will be incurred by the Coachella Valley Unified School District as a result of the increased traveling time and mileage associated with the project development. Cumulative impacts upon school facilities will result due to the existing state of overcrowding and the future increase of students generated by this and other projects. Findin s: 1. The proposed project will have a significant impact upon local school facilities. 2. Mitigation measures have been provided to reduce impacts to the extent feasible. 3. Project specific and cumulative impacts remain significant. DOCLC.048 Electricity: Implementation of the Green Specific Plan will not result in a significant impact to electricity services. However, the proposed project in conjunction with the cumulative projects will result in a significant cumulative impact to electricity services. Findings: 1. Cumulative impacts remain significant on a growth inducing level. 2. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts in the Statement of Overriding; Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. Gas. Implementation of the Green Specific Plan will result in an increase in demand for gas services. This project will have a significant cumulative impact on a growth inducing level. indin s: 1. Cumulative impacts remain significant on a growth inducing level. 2. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into this project which will partially mitigate to the extent feasible. 3. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effects. Solid Waste: The Green project will represent a significant increase in solid waste at the cumulative level. Findin s: 1. Mitigation measures will be incorporated into the proposed project that will partially mitigate significant impacts to the extent feasible. 2. Cumulative impacts remain significant. 3. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. DOCLC.O48 EZHIBIT "D" FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGABLE TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION: The Green Specific Plan is expected to be built out by the Year 2000. The following intersections in the Year 2000 will operate at or below LOS D with or without the development of this project or the neighboring Travertine project. Jefferson St.150th Avenue Jefferson St.152nd Avenue Jefferson SL154th Avenue The recommended mitigation measures will mitigate both the project specific and the cumulative traffic impacts to a less than significant level. Findings: 1. Existing intersections will operate at or below LOS D in Tear 2000 with or without the development of the proposed project. 2. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval which will mitigate traffic impacts to a level of insignificance. NOISE: The Green Specific Plan will not generate cumulatively significant audible noise increases at any of the links analyzed. However, potentially audible cumulative noise increases are projected to occur at the following links: Madison St./North of Airport Blvd. Madison SUNorth of 58th Avenue 54th AvenuelWest of Madison St. 58th AvenuelWest of Madison St. 58th Avenue/West of Monroe St. Findings: 1. Potential audible noise is projected to occur at several links. 2. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval that will reduce the impacts to a level of insignificance. DOCLC.056 WATER RESOURCES: The proposed project will utilize a CM generation factor of 1,500 gallonsiper unitiper day for domestic water. Wastewater effluent would be sent via the proposed system to the Mid -Valley Reclamation Plant for treatment. The water district has indicated that they have the capacity of servicing the site. Sewer service impacts are significant. However, mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval that will reduce those impacts to a level of insignificance. Findings: 1. Sewer service impacts are significant. 2. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval that will reduce these impacts to a level of insignificance. SOILSIGEOLOGYISEISMIC: The Green Specific Plan site is located on Myoma fine sand. Development on this site will not result in a significant impact from a soils and geology standpoint. Additionally, the site does not contain prime agricultural soils nor is it within the Coachella Valley Blowsand Region. Impacts to the Green project, from seismic events, are similar to that of the Travertine project. These impacts include ground rupture, liquefaction, and landsliding. The Green site also consists of potential slide areas along proposed residential areas. Steep mountainous rock outcrops dominate approximately 200 acres of the project site. This is a potentially significant impact. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval to ensure a reduction of potential landslide hazards. Findings: 1. There is a potential hazard from landslides to the project. 2. Mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project in order to mitigate this hazard to a level of insignificance. BIOLOGY: The Green project would develop approximately 100 acres of the total 331-acre site. The loss of 100 acres of natural habitat is considered significant valley -wide. Specific impacts to individual sensitive plant species, including the removal of barrel cactus are considered significant. The elimination of wildlife habitat would occur on -site. The project would cause disturbance and stress to offsite bighorn sheep as a result of site preparation, construction, light, glare, noise, hikers, and domestic animals. This is considered a significant impact. The project has the potential to impact the blueline stream course on - site due to construction activities. This is a significant impact. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval that will mitigate the bighorn sheep and the blueline stream to levels that are less than significant. DOCLC.O56 Findings: 1. Potential significant adverse impacts to the bighorn sheep have been identified as a result of development of the Green Specific Plan. 2. Potential significant adverse impacts to an on -site blueline stream have been identified as a result of development of the project. 3. Mitigation measures will be required for this project that will mitigate these impacts to a less than significant level. RECREATION: At buiidout, the Green project would generate approximately 790 persons based on 2.85 persons per household which accounts for both permanent and seasonal residents. This project, together with other past, and future project will increase the utilization of parks and recreational facilities in the City. This is a significant cumulative impact. Finding: 1. Cumulative impacts have been identified for this project on the City's recreation facilities. 2. Mitigation measures will be made a part of this project approval that will mitigate adverse Impacts on recreation facilities to a less than significant level. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES: Based on the number of housing units and population, the Green Specific Plan will require one fire defense facility and one pumper staffed with two persons. This is a significant impact. Cumulative development within the City of La 4uinta and the proposed Travertine and Green Specific Plans will ultimately affect fire protection services. Findings: 1. The proposed project will result in significant impacts to fire protection services. z These impacts will be mitigated through payment of fire mitigation fees to the City of La Quint& and the Riverside County FYre Department, and through compliance with fire protection development requirements. The proposed specific plan will impact the existing hospital and medical center facilities. The development of this project and others will result in a need for additional medical services. However, DOCLC.O56 the medical facilities affected continually forecast and anticipate growth in the area to ensure services commensurate with need. Findings: 1. The proposed project will impact the existing medical facilities. 2, No mitigation measures are proposed as these facilities anticipate growth in their facilities to provide services commensurate with the projected need. Implementation of the Green and Travertine projects will result in a substantial increase in demand for telephone services. Necessary expansion of the on -site and off -site telephone lines shall be identified during the development planning stage for each project. The appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce any significant impacts. 1. The proposed project will contribute to the cumulative impact to telephone service in the project area. 2. Mitigation measures will be identified through coordination with the local telephone company to provide service and lessen any impact to a less than significant level. The Green Specific Flan will result in an increased demand for cable television services on the project specific level. Necessary expansion of the on -site and off -site cable lines will be identified during the development planning stages. The developer will coordinate the installation of cable services with the local cable company. Findings: 1. The proposed project will result in an increased demand for cable services. 2. Mitigation measures will be required that will mitigate the project specific and cumulative impacts to a level that is less than significant. DOCLUM _I31, E%HIBIT "E" FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION Print to recommending adoption of Specific Plan 94-025, the Planning Commission has considered all of the alternatives presented in the Draft EIR and Final EM and finds that the alternatives other than the preferred alternative are infeasible based on economic, environmental, and other considerations as set forth below. Implementation of this alternative assumes that the project site would remain in its current land use as vacant desert open space. This alternative would avoid the impacts associated with all of the issue areas assessed by the EIR. Although the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative to the extent that only the natural environment is considered, it would also mean that the projects objectives would not be achieved and the 277 housing units would not be built. This would reduce the future housing supply in the City of La Quinta. Based on these considerations, the Planning Commission finds that Alternative 1 is infeasible. Alternative 2 would proposed development of the project site utilizing the current General Plan land use designation of Open Space, with a permitted density of 1 dwelling unit per 10 acres. This would result in approximately 30 units that could be built on the project site. Implementation of this alternative would fewer environmental impacts except for cultural resources, populationihousinglemployment, risk of upset, and public serviceslutilities, which would have similar impact as the proposed project. The applicant's residential objective would only partially be realized under this alternative. Based on these considerations, the Planning Commission finds that Alternative 2 is infeasible. Alternative 3 for the Green Specific Plan would propose to cluster approximately 277 dwelling units. The clustered areas will help to avoid biologically sensitive areas. This alternative would result in fewer environmental impacts except for land use, soils/geology/seismic, hydrologylstormwater, cultural resources, populatlonlhousinglemployment, risk of upset, and public serviceslutilitles, which would have similar impact as the proposed project. Based on these considerations, the Planning Commission finds that Alternative 3 is infeasible. DOCUM ATTACHMENT #6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 94-047 CASE NO. GPA 94-047 - WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28th day of March, 1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Winchester Development Corporation for a General Plan Amendment from Open Space designation to Very Low Density Residential, Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential, and Open Space, on ±331 acres generally located west of the Jefferson Street: extension, south of Avenue 58, and south of The Quarry development, more particularly described as: BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, S.B.B.M. ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 761-030-001 WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment 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 Department has completed a Draft and Final EIR, which have been reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta. 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. 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment, as requested, is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment designations will replace the inconsistent land use designation on the site. 3. The proposed land use designations are consistent and compatible with surrounding land use and zoning designations along with approval of Change of Zone 94-077, and Specific Plan 94-025. RESOCC.108 4. Approval of this proposal will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment due to mitigation measures contained in the EIR which will be incorporated into the approval conditions for Specific Plan 94-025, except where overriding considerations are recognized in conjunction with the Final EIR prepared as part of this proposal. 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 certification by separate resolution of the Final EIR for this Amendment by the La Quinta City Council. 3. That it does hereby recommend City Council approval of the above described General Plan Amendment 94-047 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 28th day of March, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: IIM NOES: _ : `M U � ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOcc.108 ATTACHMENT #7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CHANGE OF ZONE 94-077 TO THE CITY COUNCIL CASE NO. CZ 94-077 - WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (GREEN) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28th day of March, 1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a change of zone from Hillside Conservation (H-C) to Single Family Residential (R-1) on 26.6 acres, Multiple Family Residential (R-2) on 67.5 acres and Hillside Conservation (H-C) on 231.2 acres located west of Jefferson Street, south of 58th Avenue, and south of The Quarry development, more particularly described as: PORTIONS OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 761-030.001 WHEREAS, said Change of Zone 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 Planning Director has determined that the Change of Zone could have a significant adverse impact on the environment and an Environmental Impact Report was prepared 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 Change of Zone. 1. The proposed change of zones will not adversely affect the planned development as specified by the General Plan for the City of La Quinta. 2. The proposed change of zone will further the intent of the goals and policies of the General Plan and Specific Plan 94-025. 3. There will be no significant impacts resulting from this change of zone. 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 recommend certification of the EIR by separate resolution:. RESOPC.147 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Change of Zone 94-076 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as illustrated in the map labeled Exhibit "All,attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 28th day of Much,1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Don Adolph, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.147 ATTACHMENT #F PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 CASE NO. SP 94-025 - WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28th day of March, 1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Winchester Development Corporation for a 331.1 acre project, consisting of 277 residential units and 231.2 acres of open space recreation on a site generally located west of Jefferson Street (extended), south of 58th Avenue, and south of The Quarry development, more particularly described as: BEING A :PORTION OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIPS 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, S.B.B.M. ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 761-030-001 WHEREAS, said Specific Plan 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 Department has completed a Draft and Final EIR, which have been reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta. 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 Specific Plan. 1. The proposed Specific Plan, in conjunction with General Plan Amendment 94-047 and Change of Zone 94-077, is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The Specific Plan, as conditioned, is compatible with the existing and anticipated area development. 3. The project will be; provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. 4. Adherence to the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR, which have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval, will ensure that all identified significant impacts will be reduced to levels of non -significance, with the exception xesocc.im of impacts to those issues, for which Statements of Overriding Considerations will be adopted by the La Quinta City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: 1. That the above recitations are trace and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend certification by separate resolution of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this Amendment to the La Quinta City Council. 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above described Specific Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached as Exhibit "A". PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 28th day of March, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California REsocGlo7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 - Winchester Asset Development Corporation (Green) MARCH 28,1995 GENERAL: 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the property to which they apply. 2. Specific Plan 94-025 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 3. The development shall comply with Exhibit "A", the specific plan for Specific Plan 94-025, the Final EIR and the following conditions, which shall take precedence in the event of any conflicts with the provisions of the Specific Plan. 4. Exterior lighting for the project shall comply with the "Dark Sky" Lighting Ordinance. Plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. 6. This specific plan approval shall expire and become void within two years unless extended by the Planning Commission through the approval of an annual program review. The annual review shall be requested at least 30-days prior to the expiration. 7. During annual review by the Commission, the developerlapplicant shall be required to demonstrate good .faith compliance with the terms of the specific plan. The applicant/developer of this project hereby agrees to furnish such evidence of compliance as the City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. Evidence of good faith compliance may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, good faith progress towards Implementation of and compliance with the requirements of the specific plan. Upon conclusion of the annual review, the Commission may determine that the applicant has made good faith compliancelprogress and may extend the specific plan for one year. 8. This approval shall be in compliance with the approvals of General Plan Amendment 94-047 and Change of Zone 94-077. 9. Applicantideveloper shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The applicantldeveloper is required to work with Waste Management in setting up waste collection and recycling programs for this project. CONAPRVL.15O Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025-Green March 28,1995 10. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the Conditions of Approval, phasing plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The phasing plans are not approved until they are signed by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations in the order of the approved phasing plan. improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be complete and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a sub -phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer. 11. Prior to the issuance of a grading 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 County Environmental Health Department * Desert Sands Unified School District * Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) * Imperial Irrigation District * California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans. Evidence of permits or clearances from the above jurisdictions shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 12. 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. ENVIRONMENTAL 13. All adopted mitigation measures, as recommended in the Draft[Final EIR shall be incorporated into all future project approvals relating to Specific Plan 94-025 where applicable and/or feasible. It is understood that certain measures will not be applicable to certain site specific proposals, however, all development within the specific plan area shall be verified as in CONAPRVL.150 2 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.025-Green March 28,1995 conformance with said specific plan and the mitigation adopted within the Draft/Final EIR. The Specific Plan Draft and Final EIR shall be used in the review of all project proposals in the Specific Plan 94-025 area. Said mitigation measures are hereby incorporated into these conditions by reference. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: 14. Any proposed entry gates shall be subject to separate plot plan reviews to insure adequate stackinglqueuing space, fire access, etc. Plans including guard houses or similar structures will also be subject to Planning Commission approval. 15. Separate plot plan review of any maintenance facility site(s) shall be required with action taken by the Planning Commission, with a report of action to be sent to the City Council. 16. Building heights for residential uses shall be subject to height limits specified in the specific plan, except that no building or structure, regardless of use, exceeding one story (20-feet in heights shall be allowed within 200-feet of any perimeter property line/public street frontage. All building heights shall be measured from finish grade elevation. All other residential structures shall be limited to two stories, not to exceed 28-feet. 17. The minimum dwelling unit (living area) size for all residential units shall be 1,400 square feet (excluding attached or detached parking garage). 18. All dwelling units shall have a minimum two car garage measuring 20-feet by 20-feet in overall size. The garage can be either attached or detached. 19. The architectural style of the project shall be Spanish Colonial, Southwest Adobe, Pueblo, or other styles approved by the Planning Commission. 20. All roofing material within the project shall be clay or concrete tile barrel. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues. 21. All residencesidwellings are required to have illuminated building address numbers per the La Quinta Municipal Code. PROPERTY RIGHTS: 22. All easements, rights -of -way and other property rights necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the subdivision 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 CONAPRVL.150 3 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.025•Green March 28,1995 approval of a final map or filing of a Certificate of Compliance for waiver of a final 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 required improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels. 23. 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 to those properties alternate rights -of -way or access easements on alignments approved by the City Council. 24. The applicant shall dedicate public 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. Dedication required of this development include: A. Jefferson Street (realigned) - full -width right-of-way, width shall be determined in the approved Jefferson Street Alignment Study. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, etc. The applicant shall dedicate street rights -of -way prior to required approvals of any proposed subdivision or improvements to land within the specific plan boundaries. 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, then developer shall grant temporary public access easements to those areas within 60-days of written request by the City. 25. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot wide public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. 26. The applicant shall dedicate 20-foot common area setback lots adjacent to Jefferson Street. If interior streets are private, the dedication shall be to a homeowners' association. If interior streets are public, the dedication shall be to the City. The minimum width may be used as an acreage width if a meandering wall design is approved. Where sidewalks, bikepaths, and/or equestrian trails are required, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements over the setback Hots for those purposes. CONAPRVL.150 4 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.025-Green March 28,1995 27. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Jefferson Street from lots abutting the street. Access to the development from Jefferson Street shall be restricted to that shown on the "Circulation" diagram in the specific plan. 28. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, park lands, drainage basins, common areas, and mailbox clusters. 29. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval of this specific plan 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. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 30. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or enter into a secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City for any tentative tract map, parcel map, or approved phase of development prior to approval of the map or phase or issuance of a certificate of compliance in -lieu of a final map. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 31. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of the improvement costs. The estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not contained in the City's schedule of costs, 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. 32. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements (i.e., streets) and development -wide improvements (i.e., perimeter walls, common area and setback landscaping, and gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the engineer. CONAPRVL.150 5 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94025•Green March 28,1995 IMPROVEMENT PLANS: 33. 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 and Drainage", and "Landscaping". All plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer and are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, parking lots, and water and sewer plans. Combined plans including water and sewer improvements shall have an additional signature block for the CVWD. The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscaping improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above, shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 34. The City may maintain digitized standard plans for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the developer may acquire the standard plan computer files or standard plan sheets prepared by the City. When final plans are approved by the City, the developer shall furnish accurate computer files of the complete, approved plans on storage media and in program format acceptable to the City Engineer. GRADING: 35. Graded but 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. 36. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 37. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted. The report of the investigation ("the soils report") shall be submitted with the grading plan. CONAPRVL.150 6 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.025-Green March 28,1995 38. 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 confirm 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(4 if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 39. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within this development but not sharing common street frontage where the differential shall not exceed five feet. 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. 40. 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 6.10, La Quinta Municipal Code. 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. 41. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant shall provide a separate document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer, goetechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, for each building pad in the development state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by development phase and lot number and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. DRAINAGE: 42. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm shall be retained on site (rather than detained and released as proposed in the specific plan document). The tributary drainage area for which the developed is responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 43. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2.5 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is determined by the City Engineer to be impracticable. CONAPRVL.150 7 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025-Green March 28,1995 44. If individual lot retention is approved, the following conditions shall apply: A. Each private lot proposed for on -site retention shall be designed to receive and safely convey stormwater in excess of retention capacity, including inflow from adjacent properties. Front yards shall drain to the street unless constrained by the overall lay of the land. Basin capacity calculations and grading plans for each lot shall consider previously -approved grading plans for adjacent properties and shall be submitted, with copies of the previously approved adjacent lot plans, to the City Engineer for plan checking and approval. B. Prior to or concurrently with recordation of the final subdivision map, a homeowners' association or lot owner's association (HOA) shall be legally established and Covenants, Conditions and Restriction (CC & Rs) recorded. The CC & Its shall stipulate the requirement for design, construction and maintenance of individual on lot basins and the required retention capacity for each individual lot. The CC & Rs shall grant the HOA irrevocable rights to enter and maintain each individual retention basin and all other grading and facilities necessary for the stormwater retention design. The CC & Its shall establish, in an irrevocable manner that: 1. The HOA has responsibility for the overall retention capacity of the development, 2. If the HOA fails to maintain the overall retention capacity, the City shall have the right to seek other remedies to restore and/or maintain the overall capacity or to establish or expand downstream facilities to mitigate the off - site effects of the HOA's failure to maintain the overall capacity; and; 3. The HOA shall promptly reimburse the City for any and all costs incurred in exercising such right. C. The final subdivision map shall establish a perpetual easement granting the City the right to enter and maintain retention basins and other drainage facilities and grading as necessary to preserve or restor the approved stormwater conveyance and retention design with no compensation to any property owner of the HOA. 45. In design of retention facilities, the basin percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. IF retention is on individual lots, the retention depth shall not exceed two feet. If retention is in one or more common retention basins, the retention depth shall not exceed six feet. CONAPRVL.150 8 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.025-Green March 28,1995 46. 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. 47. No fence or wall shall be constructed around retention basins except as approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 48. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 49. 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. 50. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 51. If any portion of the 100-year, 24-hour storm flow from this development is to be conveyed directly or indirectly to the Whitewater Storm Evacuation Channel or the La Quinta Evacuation Channel or will otherwise drain to water bodies subject to the NPDES, 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 the potential for conveyance of stormwater contamination to off -site locations. Drainage to off -site locations an methods of treatment or screening shall meet the approval of the City Engineer and CVWD. UTILITIES 52. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately 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. 53. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. STREETS AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS: 54. 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. CONAPRVL.150 9 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94025•Green March 28,1995 If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall design and construct street improvements as listed below. 55. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Q,uinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Street right-of-way geometry for cuff -de -sacs, 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. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design procedure 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.14.50" a.b. Collector 4.0"15.00" Secondary Arterial 4.01116.00" Primary Arterial 4.51116.00" Major Arterial 5.51116.50" If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section which will be subjected to traffic loadings, the partial section shall be designed with a strength equivalent to the 20-year design strength. 56. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street mane 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. 57. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond subdivision boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions, or other incidental work which will insure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing Improvements and conform with the City's standards and practices. 58. The following minimum. street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS CONAPRVL.150 10 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.025-Green March 28,1995 1. 58th Avenue, Jefferson Street and 62nd Avenue have several alignment issues that have been addressed by the Jefferson Street Alignment Study which identifies a new alignment to resolve those issues. Development of Phases II and III, as defined in the "Phasing Plan" diagram of this specific plan, shall not begin until at least two lanes of the realigned streets have been installed from 58th Avenue to the south line of Section 29. 2. Jefferson Street (adjacent to this development) - improvement section as determined by the Jefferson Street Alignment Study. B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CULS DE SAC 1. Residential - 36-feet wide if double loaded (buildings on both sides 32-feet if single loaded. 2. Collector (z300 homes or 3,000 vpd) - 40-feet wide. 59. All streets proposed for, residential or other access drives shall be designed and constructed with curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas. 60. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted to locations shown on the "Circulation" diagram of the specific plan. 61. Prior to occupancy of completed buildings within the development, the applicant shall install traffic control devices and street name signs along access roads to those buildings. LANDSCAPING 62. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback areas or lots along Jefferson Street. 63. 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. CONAPRVL.150 11 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.025-Green March 28,1995 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. 64. 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. 65. Slopes shall not exceed 3:1 in perimeter setbacks, medians and other publicly- or commonly - maintained landscape areas. 66. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins and park areas shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment. 67. The applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 68. Prior to approval of building permits the applicant shall prepare a water conservation plan which shall include consideration of. A. Methods to minimize the consumption of water, including water saving features Incorporated into the design of the structures, the use of drought tolerant and low-water usage landscaping materials, and programs to increase the effectiveness of landscape and golf course irrigation, as recommended by CVWD and the State Department of Water Resources. B. Methods for maximizing groundwater recharge, including the construction of groundwater recharge facilities. C. Methods for minimizing the amount of water used for on -site irrigation, including the use of reclaimed water from sewage treatment facilities. The water energy plan shall be subject to review and acceptance by CVWD prior to final approval by the City Engineer. 69. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planning materials shall be required for at least 90% of common planting areas. Provisions shall also be made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby wildlife. 70. The applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the CVWD for review and approval with respect to the District's Water Management Program. PUBLIC SERVICES - FIRE MARSHAL: CONAPRVL.150 12 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025-Green March 28,1995 71. All water mains and fire hydrants providing the required fire flows shall be constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code in effect at the time of development. 72. The level of service required for this project shall be aligned with the criteria for Catalog II - Urban as outlined in the Fire Protection Master Plan and as follows: A. Fire station located within three miles. B. Receipt of full "first alarm" assignment within 15 minutes. Impacts to the Fire Department are generally due to the increased number due to the increased number of emergency and public service calls generated by additional buildings and human population. A fiscal analysis for this project shall identify a funding source to mitigate any impacts associated with any capitol costs and the annual operating costs necessary for an increased level of service. Said analysis shall be subject to review and approval by the Riverside County Fire Department and the City of La Quinta. COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT: 73. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the CVWD as stated in the District's letter dated December 28,1994, attached to these Conditions of Approval. During project development all irrigation facilities shall be designed to utilize reclaimed water sources when such sources become available. ELECTRICAL UTILITIES: 74. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Imperial Irrigation District as stated in the District's letter dated November 15,1994, attached to these Conditions of Approval. RECREATION: 75. Prior to any final map approval by the City Council, the applicant shall meet the parkland dedication requirements as set forth in Section 13.24.030, La Quinta Municipal Code and in compliance with the goals and policies of the La Quinta Parks and Recreation Master Plan. 76. The applicant shall provide public transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit and/or the City Engineer. These amenities shall include, as a minimum, a bus turnout location and passenger waiting shelter. The location and character of the turnout and shelter shall be as determined by Sunline Transit and the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.15O 13 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.025-Green March 28,1995 QUALITY ASSURANCE 77. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 78. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have his or her agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings and certify compliance of all work with approved plans, specifications and applicable codes. 79. 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. MAINTENANCE 80. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of landscaping and related improvements in landscaped setbacks, retention basins and other public or common areas until those areas have been accepted for maintenance by a homeowner's association (developments with private and/or gated interior streets) or the City's Landscape and Lighting District (developments without private or gated interior streets). The applicant shall maintain all other improvements until final acceptance, by the City Council, of all improvements within each map or phase. 81. The applicant shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet for streets, landscaping and related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, or any other improvements to be maintained by an BOA. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the BOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance. FEES AND DEPOSITS 82. 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 the plan checks and permits. 83. 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 all costs of the reapportionment. CONAPRVL.150 14 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.025-Green March 28,1995 84. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the following: "Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the Community Development Department with written clearance from the DSUSD stating that the per -unit impact fees have been paid." 85. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $850.00 plus $78.00 for the Riverside County document processing. The fee shall be paid within 24-hours after review by the City Council. MISCELLANEOUS 86. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination system (NPDES) and the City's NPDES permit. 87. If the City finds it necessary to revise or abandon the Jefferson Street specific alignment contemplated at the time of approval of this specific plan, the applicant shall revise this specific plan as required by the City to fully address revised access routing. 88. For all open space designated areas that are 20-percent or more in slope, a conservation easement shall be prepared for City review and approval prior to recordation with the County Recorder's Office. CONAPRVL.150 15 ATTACHMENT #9 EIR DISTRIBL�TIONI LIST City of [-a Quinta CityManager Enti,inc:c�r4inZ'Publi,c'A'oi-k,5 Building & Safety Parks & Recreation FM.- Marshal Shcriffs Departi-ricnt cltv Attorney Community Devi-lopment Director Principal Planner (2) Associate Planner (3) Plann1n,!:; Commissioners (7,, CitN, Council (5), RespoijOble Agencies: (:hambu of Cornnnerce La Quinta Library Impen'all Im'alation District Southerl Califon-na Gas Desert Sands Unified School District Coach0la Valle% 1,-'n1fit.,d School District Bur-cau of Land Nlana-ernnt Kaste 1,lanagern,211t L, S Postal ServiCe General T elephoric Colon-vC-able Sunline Transit Coachella Valley Nrchau-olo,'mcal Society Building Indusi-R, kssi-xiation - De-;erl COUnCil Cit) of Indio CM of Coaclieflia Coachella Valley Mountain Cunser\ ancy Coachella Valley Recreation 6,-, Parks L.S. Bu.-eau Of Reclamation Rive.-i-side Count-,- Planning Depairtment Rlver,,Ide Counti, 'Envirommental Health Coachella Valley Association .,)f Grover-riments Torres- Marti nez'f ribal Couric;l U.S. Fish & Wildlife Sel'mcc Desert Riders, OPP, George Me) er - Co,"D Statt- Fish &,- Gamic Sol] Consen-allon Scrvice Siena Club Ann , Corp SCAQMD County Reolonal Park .�,bflerlc,% PH #4 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: MARCH 28,1995 CASE NO: SPECIFIC PLAN 94-026 - TRAVERTINE SPECIFIC PLAN GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 94-049 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - EA 94-287 REQUEST: 1. CERTIFICATION OF AN INITIAL STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT. 2. APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO GOLF COURSE OPEN SPACE (G), LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR), NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC), AND TOURIST COMMERCIAL (TC). 3. APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC PLAN FOR 2,300 RESORT HOMES, TWO GOLF COURSES, RESORT HOTEL, AND COMMERCIAL ON 909.2 ACRES. APPLICANTIPROPERTY OWNER: TRAVERTINE CORPORATION REPRESENTATIVE/ ENGINEER: THE KEITH COMPANIES LOCATION: PORTIONS OF SECTION 3, 4, 5, AND 33, TOWNSHIP 5 AND 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST ZONING: EXISTING, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR - 2 TO 4 DU/AC) PROPOSED: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR - 2 TO 4 DUTAC) TOURIST COMMERCIAL (TC) GOLF COURSE OPEN SPACE (G) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 94-287 FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. THEREFORE, AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT HAS BEEN PREPARED. PCST.210 BACKGROUND: On October 17,1994 the Applicant's representative submitted an application for Specific Plan 94-026, and General Plan Amendment 94-047 to the Community Development Department. A Notice of Preparation was prepared for the Specific Plan to solicit comments on the suggested scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to be prepared for the project. An EIR was prepared in conjunction with another proposed (Winchester/Green) specific plan that neighbors the Travertine project. The Draft EIR was submitted to staff on January 18, 1995. The document was distributed on January 18, 1995, for the required 45 day comment period, which ended on March 4,1995. On January 19,1995, the City°s Historic Preservation Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the archaeological report prepared for the Travertine Specific Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS: Pursuant to provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines 15090) the lead agency is required to certify Final EIR°s as being completed in compliance with CEQA, and that the decision making body of the lead agency did review and consider the information contained in the Final EIR, prior to approving or taking action on the project. Because the Planning Commission is an advisory body and is required to make a recommendation on the project itself, it is considered appropriate for the Commission to also make a recommendation to the City Council on certification of the Final EIR. This section is intended to give a brief summary to the Planning Commission on the pertinent EIR information which should be considered. Environmental Impact Report An Initial Study Environmental Assessment (EA 94-287) was prepared for the project, in conjunction with the proposed Green project, by The Keith Companies (TKC), in October of 1994. The Initial Study, along with the Notice of Preparation, was transmitted to 33 agencies or special interest groups for review and comment. In addition, the document was transmitted to all City departments, including the Riverside County Fire Department and the Sheriffs Department. A 30-day comment period was provided. Responses were received from the following: Imperial Irrigation District Coachella Valley Water District State Fish & Game State Historic Preservation Officer Bureau of Land Management George Meyer, Professor of Geology -College of the Desert Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy La Quinta Chamber of Commerce City Departments The initial study prepared for this project identified general impacts which were not considered significantly adverse to the extent of requiring mitigation beyond applicable permitting requirements. Impacts to health were considered insignificant. PCST.210 The Initial Study determined that the proposed Travertine Specific Plan may have a significant effect on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Report was required for the project. The Initial Study identified potential or definite significant impacts in the following areas: Earth - geology, grading, erosion, geologic hazards Air - air quality, odors Water - drainage, flood hazard, quality, quantity Biological Resources - diversity, endangered species, habitat, agricultural land Noise - increase Light and Glare - new sources Land Use - alteration of existing use Natural Resources - rate of use Risk of Upset Population Housing Transportation/Circulation - movement, parking, impacts, patterns, hazards Energy Public Services - fire, police, schools, parks & recreation, maintenance & roads Utilities - water Aesthetics - scenic vistas Recreation - quantity Cultural Resources - prehistoric archaeological resources Findings of fact based on these impacts will be prepared for the City Council, s consideration when the project is presented to them for approval. Although there is no requirement in CEQA that the Planning Commission adopt these findings, there should be evidence in the record that the Planning Commission has considered the information. The City Council must adopt these findings upon certification of the Final EIR. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS: In conjunction with making the findings discussed above, the lead agency can not approve a project, for which and EIR has been prepared, unless it has been determined that any remaining significant adverse effects found to be unavoidable, as set forth in the findings required under CEQA Section 15091, are acceptable due to overriding concerns. For this project, the Final EIR indicates that impacts to land use, air quality, water, biology, and public services and utilities will remain significant even with proposed mitigation measures being implemented. CEQA Section 15093 allows a lead agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether or not to approve the project. If the benefits outweigh the environmental risks, then the adverse effect may be deemed "acceptable". If the lead agency finds this to be the case, it must state, in writing, the specific reasons to support its position based upon the Final EIR and/or any other information in the record. This is called a Statement of Overriding Considerations for review by the City Council at the time the project is to be approved. Although the Planning Commission need not adopt such a statement, it is important that the PCST.210 of the specific plan, and a switch in land uses to create a conservation buffer at the toe of Martinez Slide. The environmental issues and their associated mitigation measures discussed in the project EIR are acceptable to staff. Therefore, staff forwards a recommendation for approval of the project to the Planning Commission. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the La Quinta Planning Commission, adopt Resolution 95-_, recommending to the City Council certification of the Final EIR for Specific Plan 94-026, in accordance with the findings set forth in this staff report. 2. That the La Quinta Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95-_, recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 94-049, as proposed. 3. That the La Quinta Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 94-026, as proposed, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. EIR (Book) 2. General Plan Amendment Exhibit 3. Specific Plan (Book) 4. EIR Resolution with Exhibits A, B, C, D, E 5. General Plan Amendment Resolution 6. Specific Plan Resolution with Conditions of Approval 7. EIR Distribution List 8. Letter of Opposition PCST.21© ATTACHMENT #2 CASE Nm GENERAL :PL7 AMENDMENT. 94-049 TRAVERTI'.E CORPORATION RECOMMENDED LAND USE DESIGNATIONS SCALE: ATTACHMENT #• PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 94-026 AS BEING ADEQUATE AND COMPLETE; RECOGNIZING THE OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS TO CERTAIN ADVERSE IMPACTS; AND RECOGNIZING THE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED, BUT WHICH CAN BE REASONABLY MITIGATED, IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED SPECIFIC PLAN 94-026 - TRAVERTINE WHEREAS, Travertine Corporation has proposed a Specific Plan on 909.2 acres, consisting of 2,300 resort dwelling units on 481.2 acres, 362.9 acres of golf course, 27.2 acres of resort hotel,10 acres of commercial, and related uses; and, WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report (hereinafter "EIR") has been prepared and circulated, pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970; and, WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California and the City of La Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (hereinafter CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq. that the City shall not approve a project unless there is no feasible way to lessen or avoid significant effects; meaning all impacts have been avoided to the extent feasible or substantially lessened and any remaining unavoidable significant impacts are acceptable based on CEQA, Section 15093; and, WHEREAS, it "is the policy of the State of California and the City of La Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.), and the State Guidelines for implementation of CEQA, as amended (California Administrative Code, Section 15000 et seq.), that the City shall balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks prior to project approval; meaning that if the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered acceptable; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta has read and considered all environmental documentation comprising the EIR, has found that the EIR considers all potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project, is complete and adequate, and fully complies with all requirements of CEQA, the State Guidelines for implementation; and, RESOPC.145 Planning Commission Resolution 915- WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered certain overriding considerations to adverse impacts, the CEQA Findings and Statements of Facts; and, WHEREAS, prior to action on the project, the Planning Commission has considered all significant impacts, mitigation measures, and project alternatives identified in the EIR, has found that all potentially significant impacts on the project have been lessened or avoided to the extent feasible; and, WHEREAS, Section 15093(b) requires, where the recommendation of the Planning Commission allows the occurrences of significant effects which are identified in the FEIR but are not adequately mitigated, the City must state in writing the reasons to support its action based on the FEIR and/or other information in the record; and, WHEREAS, CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines provide 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 effects of the project unless the public agency makes written findings for each of the significant effects, accompanied by a statement of facts supporting each finding. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of the FEIR for Specific Plan 94-026 as adequate and complete. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, in addition to findings made in the body of the Final EIR, recommends to the City Council that the Statements of Overriding Considerations as shown on attached Exhibit "A" entitled "Statement of Overriding Considerations''', which is incorporated herein as though set forth at length. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, recommends to the City Council adoption of the CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts as shown on attached Exhibit "B" entitled "CEQA Findings and Statement of Fact", which is incorporated herein as though set forth at length. APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 28th day of March,1995. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RESOPC.145 Planning Commission Resolution 9& DON ADOLPH, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.145 Travertine EXHIBIT "A" STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. Implementation of the project will indirectly result in the elimination of the negative impacts associated with vacant property in favor of a quality housing development and open space recreation facilities. 2. The proposed project is necessary to enhance the quality of life in the project area 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. 3. Impacts identified as significant from project implementation are generally associated with normal growth, progress, and prosperity. 4. The project will be instrumental in causing new area -wide public facilities to be constructed, which will benefit both existing development and other future adjacent development. 5. Specific plan project implementation will ultimately create new jobs for facilities construction, future development construction, the provision of public services for a larger population base, and to staff new business and operations associated with the specific plan. 6. Improvements to local roadways will occur that will increase vehicular efficiency and local access. 7. The City's economic base will be enhanced through revenues derived from increased sales, taxes, business licenses, and other fees, taxes, and exactions from new development. 8. The proposed project is more restrictive in its development density than what would have been permitted when the project site was under County jurisdiction. DOCLC.050 Travertine EXHIBIT "B" CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS BACKGROUND 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: 1. 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 15091) of the Guidelines). Because the proposed Specific Plan 94-026 constitutes a project under CEQA and the Guidelines, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta has required an Environmental Impact Report (EIR This EIR has identified certain significant effects which may occur as a result of the project, or on a cumulative basis in conjunction with is project and other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Further, the Planning Commission recommends approval of this project and, after determining that the EIR is complete and has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the Guidelines, the findings set forth herein are made: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE INSIGNIFICANT Through preparation of the Initial Study (Environmental Checklist form), the City identified that implementation of the project would not have any significant adverse impacts on the following: Human Health: The project proposes the development of residential units a resort hotel and open space recreation. DOCLC.052 EXHIBIT "C" SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED LAND USE: The Travertine property currently is designated as Low Density Residential in the La Quinta General Plan. The Travertine Specific Plan will require a change in land use designations for various portions of the project site in order to permit the development of residential units, a resort hotel, golf courses, and accessory commercial. The following designations are proposed: Low Density Residential, Neighborhood Commercial, Tourist Commercial, and Golf Course Open Space. A General Plan Amendment will be required in order to redesignate to the proposed land uses. It can be anticipated that development of this project will influence the present pattern of land use in the City of La Quinta. Findings: 1. The proposed project is not consistent with the existing General Plan Land Use designation of Low Density Residential or R-1 zoning designation for the commercial uses. 2. The required general plan amendment will mitigate General Plan inconsistencies. 3. The conversion of open space areas to urban uses will remain significant. 4. The unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against the facts set forth on the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to .the remaining unavoidable significant effect. AIR QUALITY: The primary impacts to air quality associated with project implementation will occur from vehicular -related emissions. Indirect impacts will occur from stationary sources, including increased electrical demand requiring combustion in power plants. The project air quality analysis indicates that the thresholds for NO2 and PM10 will be exceeded during the construction phases of the Travertine Specific Plan and is therefore significant. Findings: 1. Mitigation measures have been required for the project which will partially mitigate to the extent feasible the significant impact. 2. The project will have significant long-term impacts to CO, ROC, and NO2 emissions. DOCLC.047 3. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. WATER RESOURCES: The total water demand for the 'Travertine project would be approximately 5,566,212 gallons per day at full buildout. This project, together with other closely related past, present, and future project in the Coachella Valley, will result in reductions in the existing underground water supply which is currently in s state! of overdraft, and will require further dependence on out-of-state water supplies. The impacts to the water supply within the Coachella Valley are considered cumulatively significant. Findings: 1. The proposed project will result in cumulative water impacts on the Coachella Valley. 2. Cumulative impacts remain significant due to the Coachella Valley's dry climate, exhaustible water supply, and increased dependency on imported water. 3. Potentially significant site disturbance impacts remain due to the unknown off site well and reservoir locations required by the proposed project. 4. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. BIOLOGY: The Travertine project would eliminate a portion of the population of a sensitive plant, the California barrel cactus, which was found on the rocky plains and slopes on the site. This species is listed by the USFWS as a Category 2 species. Other sensitive plants that could be impacted are the triple ribbed milk vetch and the Cove's cassia. These are considered significant impacts. The project would remove essentially all existing biological resources from at least half of the nonagricultural portion of the site. The project would remove approximately 300 acres of natural desert habitat, which will be! a direct and cumulative significant impact. The Travertine project would eliminate habitat for on -site wildlife species which are not considered sensitive species. However, this elimination is considered a significant impact. Habitat for sensitive birds found on the project site would be eliminated. These are the prairie falcon, black -tailed gnatchatcher, and the loggerhead shrike. These impacts are considered significant. Approximately 200 acres of formerly occupied desert tortoise habitat would be removed. This is considered a significant impact. The southeast area of the Travertine site is occupied habitat of the round -tailed ground squirrel, and coincides with the approximate location of part of the planned target golf course. The taking of round -tailed ground squirrel habitat is considered significant. DOCLCI.047 2 Findings: 1. The taking of sensitive plants is reduced by mitigation measures, but remains significant after mitigation due to the permanent removal of some sensitive plants. 2. The loss of natural habitat within the Coachella Valley remains unavoidable. 3. Impacts to the prairie falcon, blacktailed gnatcatcher, and loggerhead shrike habitats is lessened with implementation of the Habitat Conservation Plan, but remains significant after mitigation. 4. Impacts to the Palm Springs Round -tailed Ground Squirrels is lessened, but r e in a i n s significant after mitigation. 5. The taking of sensitive plants is reduced by mitigation but remain significant after mitigation. 6. The loss of natural habitat on -site is considered a significant and unavoidable impact. 7. Impacts to sensitive wildlife species present on -site have been reduced but remain significant after mitigation. 8. Impacts to sensitive bat species can be lessened by implementation of the Habitat Conservation Plan but remains significant after mitigation. 9. The incremental loss of habitat remains cumulatively significant and unavoidable. 10. The incremental loss of Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub, Desert dry woodland plant and animal communities within the Coachella Valley is considered cumulatively significant and unavoidable. 11. The Travertine project specific and cumulative related impacts have been reduce the extent feasible, however, these impacts remain significant. 12. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. AESTHETICS: The existing viewsheds from the Travertine project (on -site and off -site) will be significantly altered as a considerable amount of open space views will be altered with buildings, landscaped areas, and lighting due to implementation of the project. The Martinez Rock Slide which provides a significant scenic vista will be impacted. DOCLC1.047 3 The proposed project in conjunction with other proposed projects will result in a cumulatively significant impact related to increased light and glare and a decrease in the existing open space view opportunities. Findings 1. The Travertine project specific and cumulative impacts have been reduced to the extent feasible, however, these impacts remain significant. 2. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. POPULATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT: The Travertine project will result in a direct population increase of approximately 6,555 residents on -site. This project is not consistent with the population projections contained within the City of La Quinta General Plan Buildout analyses and is considered a significant impact. The project will increase the concentration of population in an area that is currently vacant open space, resulting in a significant impact. However, the development of these residential units will aid the City of La Quinta in meeting the goal established in the Housing Element of insuring the provision of adequate housing, including a range of housing types and costs for all existing and future residents of La Quinta. The project will result in population, housing, and employment and is not consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan or SCAG's projections. Findings• 1. Project specific and cumulative population, housing, and employment impacts are considered significant and growth inducing. 2. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES: Schools• The Travertine project will have a significant impact upon the local schools. Students generated by the proposed project will add to the existing and anticipated overcrowded conditions at the schools that will serve the site. Additional travel -related costs will be incurred by the Coachella Valley Unified School District and Desert Sands Unified School District, as a result of the increased traveling time and mileage associated with the project development. Cumulative impacts upon school facilities will result due to the existing state of overcrowding and the future increase of students generated by this and other projects. DOCLC1.047 Findings: 1. Mitigation measures have been provided to reduce impacts to the extent feasible. 2. Project specific and cumulative impacts remain significant. 3. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. Electricity: Implementation of the Travertine project will result in an increased demand for electricity services. This project in conjunction with other projects will result in a significant cumulative impact in electricity services. Findings: 1. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed project which will mitigate the project specific impacts to a levels of insignificance, however, the cumulative impacts remain significant on a growth inducing level. 2. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. Gas: Implementation of the Travertine project will result in an increased demand for gas services. This is a significant impact. The Travertine project will have a significant cumulative impact on a growth inducing level. Findings: 1. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into this proposed project, which will partially mitigate to the extent feasible this significant impact. 2. Cumulative impacts remain significant on a growth inducing level. 3. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. DOCLC1.047 Solid Waste• The Travertine project will represent a significant increase in solid waste. This project in conjunction with other projects will pose a cumulatively significant impact. Findings• 1. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed project that will partially mitigate to the extent: possible this significant impact. 2. Cumulative impacts :remain significant. 3. The remaining unavoidable significant effect is acceptable when balanced against facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, giving weight to the remaining unavoidable significant effect. DOCLC1.047 EXHIBIT "D" FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGABLE TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION: The Travertine Specific Plan is expected to be built out by the year 2020. The following intersections under General Plan buildout conditions require signalization to improve the Level of Service (LOS), with or without the Travertine Specific Plan. The ultimate development of the dwelling units, resort hotel, commercial, and open space uses in the project will generate a significant increase in local and regional traffic volumes. Findings: 1. Mitigation measures will be made a part of the project approval which will mitigate this impact to a level of insignificance. 2. The proposed project specific and cumulative traffic related impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level. NOISE: The proposed Travertine project will result in potentially audible noise increases at the following links: Madison St./North of Airport Blvd. Madison St./North of Avenue 58 Avenue 541West of Madison St. Avenue 58/West of Madison St. This project will experience cumulatively significant audible noise increases at the following intersections: Avenue 62 east and west of Madison St. Madison Street north ,and south of Avenue 62 Monroe Street from the project site to Avenue 58 The following roadway links will experience potentially audible noise increase: Monroe StreetlNorth of Avenue 50 Avenue 541West of Madison Street DOCLC.051 Findings: 1. Mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project approvals that will mitigate these impacts to a less than significant level. WATER RESOURCES: The proposed Travertine project would generate approximately 710,632 gallons per day (gpd) of wastewater effluent at build out, which would be sent via the proposed system to the Mid -Valley Reclamation Plant. This would increase the daily treatment demand from 2.5 mgd to 3.2 mgd. The Coachella Valley Water District has indicated that they have the capacity of servicing the site. However, sewer service impacts remain significant since the project is bringing sewer service into an area that does not have existing facilities. Mitigation measures have been required for the project that will reduce these impacts to a, level less than significant. Findings: 1. Project specific water and sewer impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level. SOILSIGEOLOGYISEISMIC: The Travertine Specific Plan proposes to construct on rubble land (RUB, Rock outcrop (R% and Carrizo Stoney sand (CcC). These soils are not considered suitable for homesites. The nature of these soils are not conducive to homesites or golf courses because the granitic rock and boulders in these areas would subject people to potentially hazardous rockfall conditions. Soils erosion impacts from development within these areas are considered significant and adverse if not mitigated properly. This project would develop single-family residences, a resort hotel, and two golf courses within Groundshaking Zone III. These land uses are considered normal and low risk land uses and are provisionally suitable. However, the entire development would be subject to potential seismic -related impacts. The project site may be subject to erosion due to active uplift of regional faults, relatively soft rock units, sparse vegetation, and seasonal rainfall. Slides could occur from adjacent existing formations such as the Martinez Slide onto the project site. Findings: 1. There is potential hazards from high wind erosion, seismic events, and landslide activity to the project. 2. Mitigation measures and project changes will be incorporated into the project in order to mitigate these hazards to a level that is less than significant. DOCLC.051 2 HYDROLOGY: The Travertine Specific Plan proposes a drainage plan to circumvent the impacts associated with stormwater flows. This project in conjunction with other past, present, and foreseeable future projects will not impact downstream receiving waters. Mitigation measures will be required for the project that will reduce impacts associated with hydrologic issues to a level that is less than significant. Findings: 1. There is a potential for the project to be impacted by the historical flows of stormwater runoff. 2. Mitigation measures will be required for this project that will mitigate these impacts to a level that is less than significant. BIOLOGY: The Travertine project would eliminate habitat for wildlife species on -site. Potential indirect impacts to the bighorn sheep which may frequent the hills overlooking the project site to the west and south are considered significant. However, the project will be required to ensure that a habitat management plan for the bighorn sheep is prepared and implemented. Elements of this management plan will include but are not limited to: designating a buffer area separating the developed area from the toe of the slope; usage of sound walls; restrictions on outdoor lighting; usage of nonreflective surfaces; leash laws for pets; and education of property owners. This plan shall be prepared by a biologist expert in the study of the bighorn sheep and reviewed by the California Department of Fish and Game, prior to issuance of a grading permit. This plan will serve as mitigation that will lower the impact to a level that is less than significant. The Travertine project will remove approximately 200 acres of formerly occupied desert tortoise habitat, this is a significant impact. The applicant will be required to comply with the CDFG Findings: 1. The proposed project will have indirect impacts on the bighorn sheep that may frequent the hills overlooking the project site to the west and south. 2. These impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level. 3. The proposed project will impact former habitat of the Desert Tortoise. 4. This impact will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. 5. The proposed project has the potential to significantly impact the blueline stream course on -site due to construction activities. DOCLC.051 3 6. Impacts to the blueline stream course can be mitigated to a less than significant level. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Cultural resources were found on the Travertine project site. These resources consist of prehistoric archaeological sites and isolates. An. archaeological survey and study was conducted on the project site to locate and determine the significance of the sites. The analysis determined that the archaeological sites are less than significant according to state criteria for such determinations. Findings: 1. Prehistoric archaeological resources were located and assessed on the Travertine Specific Plan site. 2. These cultural resources were determined not to be significant according to state criteria. RECREATION: The Travertine project would generate approximately 6,555 persons based on 2.85 persons per household. Although the project provides for significant recreational opportunities on -site, the project would increase the utilization of off -site parks and recreational facilities. This is considered a significant impact. Mitigation measures will be required to reduce this impact to an insignificant level. Findings: 1. The proposed project will have impacts upon the park and recreation facilities of the City. 2. This impact will be reduced through the required mitigation measures to a level that is less than significant. RISK OF UPSET: The Travertine project may expose people to contaminated soils on -site, hazardous substances, etc., due to the 229 acres of actively cultivated vineyards and maintenance areas. Impacts related to the risk of upset are project specific. Mitigation will be required prior to issuance of grading permits that will assess and remediate any actual contamination. DOCLC.051 4 Findings: 1. The proposed project may pose a risk of exposure to contaminated soils as a result of cultivation activities on the project site. 2. This potential impact will be mitigated by the requirement for an assessment and appropriate remediation of any and all contaminated soils prior to issuance of a grading permit, which will reduce the impact to a less than significant level. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES: Law Enforcement: Additional staff and service personnel will need to be increased as a result of the Travertine Specific Plan. It is estimated that six additional officers will be required with the development of the project site. Consultation with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department during site planning and design of tract maps will be required to provide any needed mitigation to this impact. Findings: 1. The proposed project will impact the existing level of law enforcement necessitating an increase in law enforcement personnel. 2. This impact will be mitigated by consultation with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department to provide the required level of service resulting in a less than significant impact. Fire Protection: The Riverside County Fire Department has estimated that the Travertine Specific Plan will require one fire defense facility, one pumper staffed with a minimum of two persons, and a truck company staffed with a minimum of three persons. This is a significant impact. This project in conjunction with other proposed projects will ultimately affect fire protection services. Mitigation measures will be required to lessen the impact to fire protection services. Findings: 1. The proposed project will result in significant impacts to fire protection services. 2. These impacts will be mitigated through payment of a fire mitigation fees to the City of La Quinta and the Riverside County Fire Department, and through compliance with fire protection development requirements. DOCLC.051 Medical Services: The proposed specific plan will impact the existing hospital and medical center facilities. The development of this project and others will result in a need for additional medical services, however, the medical facilities affected, continually forecast and anticipate growth in the area to ensure services commensurate with need. Findings: 1. The proposed project will impact the existing medical facilities. 2. No mitigation is proposed as these facilities anticipate growth in their facilities to provide services commensurate with the projected need. Electricity: The proposed Travertine Specific Plan will result in an increased demand for electricity services. The project -specific impacts related to the electrical needs of the Travertine project will be mitigated to a less than significant level through the requirement for expansion of the on -site and off -site electric lines and substations during project development stage. The developer will be required to pay all costs associated with the extension of such lines and substations. Findings: 1. The proposed project will result in an increased demand for electrical services and facilities both on -site and off -site. 2. This increased demand for electrical services will be met by the developer dLdgft project development stage, which will reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant. Gas: Implementation of the Travertine Specific Plan will result in an increased demand for gas services. This is considered a significant impact. The project will contribute to a cumulative impact on a growth inducing level. Mitigation will consist of the developer paying for all required expansion of gas service to the project from the existing lines. The project -specific impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level. Findings: 1. The proposed project will impact existing gas service and result in significant growth inducing impacts. DOCLC.051 6 2. The project -specific impacts will be mitigated to a level that is less than significant. Cable Service: The Travertine project will result in an increased demand for cable television services on the project -specific level. Necessary expansion of the on -site and off -site cable lines will be identified during the development planning stage. The developer will coordinate the installation of cable services with the local cable company. Findings: 1. The proposed project will result in an increased demand for cable services. 2. Mitigation measures will be required that will mitigate the project -specific and cumulative impacts related to the provision of cable service to a less than significant level. DOCLC.051 7 EXHIBIT "E" FINDINGS CONCERNING ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION: Prior to recommending adoption Specific Plan 94-026 , the Planning Commission has considered all of the alternatives presented in the Draft EIR and Final EIR and finds that the alternatives other than the preferred alternative are infeasible based on economic, environmental, and other considerations as set forth below. Implementation of this alternative assumes that the project site would remain in its current land use as vineyards and open space. This alternative would avoid the impacts associated with all of the issue areas assessed by the EIR. Although the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative to the extent that only the natural environment is considered, it would also mean that the projects objectives would not be achieved and the 2,300 housing units would not be built. This would reduce the future housing supply in the City of La Quinta. Based on these considerations, the Planning Commission finds that Alternative 1 is infeasible. Infeasibility of Alternative 2 ' Alternative 2 would propose development of the project site utilizing the current General Plan land use designations of Low Density Residential (LDR) (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre), and Open Space (OS) ( i dwelling unit per 10 acres). Of the 909 acres, 861 acres are currently designated as LDR with the remaining acres designated OS. This alternative would result in a dwelling unit density of 2.0 du./acre being assumed for the LDR. Alternative 2 would only include residential units that were consistent with the General Plan designations. A decrease in the number of units from 2,300 to approximately 1,727 units would result. This unit reduction might result in and increase in the preservation of existing biological habitat and open space resources. Implementation of Alternative 2 would result in fewer environmental impacts to land use, traffic and circulation, noise, air quality, water and wastewater resources, biology, recreation and populationlhousinglemployment. There will be similar environmental impacts to soilslgeologylseismic, hydrologylstormwater runoff, aesthetic and cultural resources, risk of upset and public services and utilities. Although Alternative 2 is considered environmentally superior to the proposed Travertine Specific Plan project in that it reduces impacts to eight different environmental issues, 3 of the 8 reduced impacts will still remain significant after mitigation. The applicant's residential objectives would only partially be achieved with approximately 1800 dwelling units, and no recreational objectives would be achieved. Based on these considerations, the Planning Commission finds that Alternative 2 is infeasible. InfeasibilM of Alternative 3 Alternative 3 for the Travertine site will provide higher density areas in which greater affordable housing opportunities will be provided in the La quinta area. The clustering of dwelling units will partially mitigate impacts to biologically sensitive areas of the Palm Springs Round -tailed Ground Squirrel in the eastern portion of the project site, while increasing the bighorn sheep setback in the southern portion of the property. Higher densities in these areas of the site will allow clustering to preserve more desert DOCLC.049 scrub habitat with the proposed project. Implementation of Alternative 3 would result in fewer environmental impacts to traffic and circulation, noise, air quality, water and wastewater resources, biology, recreation and populationlhousinglemployment. This alternative will have similar environmental impacts to land use, cultural resources, geology/soils/seismic, aestheticslvisual, hydrologylstormwater runoff, risk of upset, and public services and utilities. This alternative is considered environmentally superior to the proposed project in that it reduces impacts to seven different environmental issues. However, 4 of the 7 reduced impacts would still remain significant after mitigation. Development of alternative 3 will clustered and will transfer dwelling units from environmentally sensitive habitat. Affordable housing opportunities will be made available for the City of La Q,uinta. This alternative meets most of the recreational and housing objectives of the applicant, however, it does not meet all of the objectives. Based on these considerations, the Planning Commission finds that Alternative 3 is infeasible. DOCLC.049 ATTACHMENT #; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 95-049 CASE NO. GPA 95-049 - TRAVERTINE CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28th day of March, 1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Travertine Corporation for a General Plan Amendment from Low Density Residential designation to Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Tourist Commercial (TC), Golf Course Open Space (G), and Open Space, on ±909.2 acres generally located west of the Jefferson Street extension, south of 64th Avenue, north of 60th Avenue, and Madison Street to the south, more particularly described as: BEING A PORTION OF SECTIONS 3, 4, 5 AND 33, TOWNSHIPS 5 AND 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment 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 Department has completed a Draft and Final EIR, which have been reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta. 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. 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment, as requested, is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment designations will replace the inconsistent land use designations on portions of the site. 3. The proposed land use designations are consistent and compatible with surrounding land use and zoning designations along with approval of Specific Plan 94-026. RESOCC.109 4. Approval of this proposal will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment due to mitigation measures contained in the EIR which will be incorporated into the approval conditions for Specific Plan 94-026, except where overriding considerations are recognized in conjunction with the Final EIR prepared as part of this proposal. NOW', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: 1. That the above recitations are trace and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend certification by separate resolution of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this Amendment by the La Quinta City Council. 3. That it does hereby recommend City Council approval of the above described General Plan Amendment 95-049 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 28th day of March, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOCC-109 ATTACHMENT #6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 94-026 CASE NO. SP 94-026 - 'TRAVERTINE CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28th day of March, 1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Travertine Corporation for a 909.2 acre project, consisting of 2,300 residential units, two golf courses, a resort hotel, commercial, and open space/recreation on a site generally bounded on the north by 60th Avenue, 64th Avenue on the south, Madison Street on the east, and Jefferson Street on the west, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF SECTIONS 3, 4, 5 AND 33, TOWNSHIPS 5 AND 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said Specific Plan 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 Department has completed a Draft and Final EIR, which have been reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta. WHE-MEAS, 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 Specific Plan. 1. The proposed Specific Plan, in conjunction with General Plan Amendment 94-026, is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The Specific Plan, as conditioned, is compatible with the existing and anticipated area development. 3. The project will be; provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. 4. Adherence to the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR, which have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval, will ensure that all identified significant impacts will be reduced to levels of non -significance, with the exception of impacts to issues, for which Statements of Overriding Considerations will be adopted by the La Quinta City Council. RESOCC.106 NOW', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: 1. That the above recitations are trace and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend certification by separate Resolution of the Final Environmental Impact Report for this Amendment by the La Quinta City Council. 3. That it does hereby recommend City Council 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 Planning Commission, held on this 28th day of March, 1995, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Chairman City of La Quinta, California M�mv JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOCC.106 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 94-026 - TRAVERTINE CORPORATION MARCH 28,1995 GENERAL : 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the property to which they apply. 2. Specific Plan 94-026 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 3. The development shall comply with Exhibit "A", the specific plan for Specific Plan 94-026, the Final EIR and the following conditions, which shall take precedence in the event of any conflicts with the provisions of the Specific Plan. 4. Exterior lighting for the project shall comply with the "Dark Sky" Lighting Ordinance. Plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. 6. Prior to any initial tract map approval, the applicant/developer shall prepare an overall plan or program for the provision of comfort station locations for all maintenance employees. This plan or program shall indicate station locations and design parameters and standards, and shall be subject to review by the Community Development Department. Said plan or program shall indicate methods of providing such facilities, the parties responsible for so doing, and means for enforcement of procedures set forth in the plan or program. 7. This specific plan approval shall expire and become void within two years unless extended by the Planning Commission through the approval of an annual program review. The annual review shall be requested at least 30-days prior to the expiration. 8. During each annual review by the Commission, the developeriapplicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the specific plan. The applicant/developer of this project hereby agrees to furnish such evidence of compliance as the City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. Evidence of good faith compliance may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, good faith progress towards implementation of and compliance with the requirements of the specific plan. Upon conclusion of the annual review, the Commission may determine that the applicant has made good faith compliancelprogress and may extend the specific plan for one year. CONAPRVL.I49 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 9. This approval shall be in compliance with the approval ofGeneral Plan Amendment 95-049. 10. The applicant shall obtain approval of the necessary change of zone in order for the project to be consistent with the proposed land uses. 11. Applicant/developer shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1452. The applicantldeveloper is required to work with Waste Management in setting up waste collection and recycling programs for this project. 12. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the Conditions of Approval, phasing plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The phasing plans are not approved until they are signed by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations in the order of the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be complete and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a sub -phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer. 13. Prior to the issuance of a grading 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 County Environmental Health Department Coachella Valley Unified School District Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) * Imperial Irrigation District * California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans. Evidence of permits or clearances from the above jurisdictions shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 14. 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.. CONAPRVL.149 2 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 • Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 ENVIRONMENTAL 15. All adopted mitigation measures, as recommended in the Draft/Final EIR shall be incorporated into all future project approvals relating to Specific Plan 94-026 where applicable and/or feasible. It is understood that certain measures will not be applicable to certain site specific proposals, however, all development within the specific plan area shall be verified as in conformance with said specific plan and the mitigation adopted within the Draft/Final EIR. The Specific Plan Draft and Final EIR shall be used in the review of all project proposals in the Specific Plan 94-026 area. Said mitigation measures are hereby incorporated into these conditions by reference. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: 16. Any proposed entry gates shall be subject to separate plot plan reviews to insure adequate stackinglqueuing space, fire access, etc. Plans including guard houses or similar structures will also be subject to Planning Commission approval. 17. Separate plot plan review of any maintenance facility site(s) shall be required with action taken by the Planning Commission, with a report of action to be sent to the City Council. 18. Building heights for residential uses shall be subject to height limits specified in the specific plan, except that no building or structure, regardless of use, exceeding one story (20-feet in height), shall be allowed within 200-feet of any perimeter property line/public street frontage. All building heights shall be measured from finish grade elevation. All other residential structures shall be limited to two stories, not to exceed 28-feet. 19. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance shall be met concerning all supplemental accessory facilities (e.g., hotel, golf courses, tennis court complex, etc.). 20. This approval does not authorize the construction of a golf clubhouse, tennis building with tennis courts, gatehouses, and a maintenance facility at the general locations shown on Exhibit "A". These buildings' specific locations, design, height, and size shall be subject to separate plot plan review and approval by the Planning Commission. 21. All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.210 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designed to minimize light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. The applicant shall submit plans for street lighting along roads, if any, for review and approval by the Community Development Department. 22. The minimum dwelling unit (living area) size for all residential units shall be 1,400 square feet (excluding attached or detached parking garage). CONAPRVL.149 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 23. The architectural style of the project shall be Spanish Colonial, Southwest Adobe, Pueblo, or other styles approved by the Planning Commission. 24. All roofing material within the project shall be clay or concrete tile barrel. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues. 25. All residencesldwellings are required to have illuminated building address numbers per the La Quinta Municipal Code. 26. The specific plan shall be revised to switch the Estate Homes planning area with the golf course located at the southern portion of the project, to provide an open space buffer along the toe of the slope to provide access to qualified scientists and Native Americans. This buffer shall be a minimum of 300-feet from the toe of the Martinez Slide. PROPERTY RIGHTS: 27. All easements, rights -of -way and other property rights necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the subdivision 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 filing of a Certificate of Compliance for waiver of a final 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 required improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels. 28. 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 to those properties alternate rights -of -way or access easements on alignments approved by the City Council. 29. The applicant shall dedicate public 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. Dedication required of this development include: A. Jefferson Street - half of full -width right-of-way for all frontage (full width for frontage on both sides} Width shall be as determined in the approved Jefferson Street alignment study. B. 62nd Avenue - full width right-of-way for all frontage. Width shall be as determined in the approved Jefferson Street alignment study. C. Madison Street - Primary Arterial - half of 110-feet right-of-way, full width adjacent to maintenance ,facility property on east side of Madison Street. CONAPRVL.149 4 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, etc. The applicant shall dedicate street rights -of -way prior to required approvals of any proposed subdivision or improvements to land within the specific plan boundaries. 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, then developer shall grant temporary public access easement s to those areas within 60-days of written request by the City. 30. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot wide public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. 31. The applicant shall designate common area setback lots, of minimum width as noted (generally 20- feet in front of lots,10-feet side, and five feet rear), adjacent to the following street rights -of -way: A. Jefferson Street - 20-feet B. Madison Street - 20-feet C. 62nd Avenue - 20-feet Minimum widths may be used as average widths for meandering wall designs. If interior streets are private, the dedication shall be to a homeowners' association. If interior streets are public, the dedication shall be to the City. Where sidewalks, bikepaths, and/or equestrian trails are required, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements over the setback lots for those purposes. 32. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Jefferson Street, Madison Street and 62nd Avenue from lots abutting the streets. Access to these streets shall be restricted to that shown on the "Circulation" diagram in the specific plan. 33. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, park lands, drainage basins, common areas, and mailbox clusters. 34. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval of this specific plan 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. CONAPRVL.149 5 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 35. The applicant shall provide a conservation easement that covers a minium of 300-feet wide buffer at the toe of the slope of the Martinez Slide. This easement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department, prior to recordation with the County Recorders Office. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 36. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or enter into a secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City for the tentative tract map, parcel map, or approved phase of development prior to approval of the map or phase or issuance of a certificate of compliance in -lieu of a final map. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 37. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of the improvement costs. The estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not contained in the City's schedule of costs, 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. 38. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements (i.e., streets) and development -wide improvements (i.e., perimeter walls, common area and setback landscaping, and gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the engineer. 39. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for applicant's required share of future improvements to be constructed by others (deferred improvements). Deferred improvements for this development include: A. Traffic signal at 62nd Avenue and Madison Street - 50% cost participation. The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the deferred improvements may, at the City's option, be satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject to such a program. CONAPRVL.149 6 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 IMPROVEMENT PLANS: 40. 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 and Drainage", and "Landscaping". All plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer and are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, parking lots, and water and sewer plans. Combined plans including water and sewer improvements shall have an additional signature block for the CVWD. The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscaping improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above, shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 41. The City may maintain digitized standard plans for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the developer may acquire the standard plan computer files or standard plan sheets prepared by the City. When final plans are approved by the City, the developer shall furnish accurate computer files of the complete, approved plans on storage media and in program format acceptable to the City Engineer. GRADING: 42. Graded but 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. 43. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 44. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted. The report of the investigation ("the soils report") shall be submitted with the grading plan. 45. 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 confirm 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. CONAPR11L.149 7 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 46. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within this development but not sharing common street frontage where the differential shall not exceed five feet. 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. 47. 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 6.10, La Quinta Municipal Code. 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. 48. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant shall provide a separate document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer, goetechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, for each building pad in the development, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by development phase and lot number and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. DRAINAGE: 49. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm shall be retained on site (rather than detained and released as proposed in the specific plan document). The tributary drainage area for which the developed is responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 50. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2.5 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is determined by the City Engineer to be impracticable. 51. If individual lot retention is approved, the following conditions shall apply: A. Each private lot proposed for on -site retention shall be designed to receive and safely convey stormwater in excess of retention capacity, including inflow from adjacent properties. Front yards shall drain to the street unless constrained by the overall lay of the land. Basin capacity calculations and grading plans for each lot shall consider previously -approved grading plans for adjacent properties and shall be submitted, with copies of the previously approved adjacent lot plans, to the City Engineer for plan checking and approval. CONAPRVL.149 8 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 B. Prior to or concurrently with recordation of the final subdivision map, a homeowners' association or lot owner's association (HOA) shall be legally established and Covenants, Conditions and Restriction (CC & Rs) recorded. The CC & Its shall stipulate the requirement for design, construction and maintenance of individual on lot basins and the required retention capacity for each individual lot. The CC & Its shall grant the HOA irrevocable rights to enter and maintain each individual retention basin and all other grading and facilities necessary for the stormwater retention design. The CC & Its shall establish, in an irrevocable manner that: 1. The HOA has responsibility for the overall retention capacity of the development; 2. If the HOA fails to maintain the overall retention capacity, the City shall have the right to seek other remedies to restore and/or maintain the overall capacity or to establish or expand downstream facilities to mitigate the off -site effects of the HOA's failure to maintain the overall capacity; and; 3. The HOA shall promptly reimburse the City for any and all costs incurred in exercising such right. C. The final subdivision map shall establish a perpetual easement granting the City the right to enter and maintain retention basins and other drainage facilities and grading as necessary to preserve or restor the approved stormwater conveyance and retention design with no compensation to any property owner of the HOA. 52. In design of retention facilities, the basin percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site-speciffic data that indicates otherwise. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. IF retention is on individual lots, the retention depth shall not exceed two feet. If retention is in one or more common retention basins, the retention depth shall not exceed six feet. 53. A trickling sand filter and leachfield to 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. 54. No fence or wall shall be constructed around retention basins except as approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 55. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. CONAPRVL.149 9 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 56. 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. 57. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 58. If any portion of the 100-year, 24-hour storm flow from this development is to be conveyed directly or indirectly to the Whitewater Storm Evacuation Channel or the La Quinta Evacuation Channel or will otherwise drain to water bodies subject to the NPDES, the applicant may be required to design and install first -flush storage, oillwater separation devices, or other screening or pretreatment method(s) to minimize the potential for conveyance of stormwater contamination to off -site locations. Drainage to off -site locations an methods of treatment or screening shall meet the approval of the City Engineer and CVWD. UTILITIES: 59. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately 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. 60. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. STREETS AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS: 61. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost of environmental studies or reports required in the realignment and/or construction of Jefferson Street south of 58th Avenue and 62nd Avenue west of Madison Street. The applicant may seek reimbursement for portions of the cost of said reports from other benefitting properties through any assessment districts which may be formed for improvement of Jefferson Street or through entering a reimbursement agreement with the City in accordance with the City's reimbursement policy. 62. 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 design and construct street improvements as listed below. CONAPRVL.149 10 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 63. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Street right-of-way geometry for cul-de-sacs, 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. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design procedure 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.14.50" a.b. Collector 4.01115.00" Secondary Arterial 4.01116.00" Primary Arterial 4.51116.00" Major Arterial 5.51116.50" If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section which will be subjected to traffic loadings, the partial section shall be designed with a strength equivalent to the 20-year design strength. 64. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, 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. 65. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond subdivision boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions, or other incidental work which will insure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the Ci[ty's standards and practices. 66. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREET'S 1. Off -site portions of 58th Avenue, Jefferson Street and 62nd Avenue have several alignment issues that have been addressed by the Jefferson Street Alignment Study which identifies a new alignment to resolve those issues. Development of this specific plan shall not begin until off -site street improvements have been installed, by the applicant or others, as follows: CONAPRVL.149 11 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 Realigned Jefferson Street from the north end of this development to 58th Avenue, and Madison Street from 58th Avenue to 62nd Avenue - at least two lanes (28-feet total paved width) plus 8-foot wide shoulders. The existing pavement on Madison Street from 58th Avenue to 60th Avenue may be incorporated in the new street section if grades are appropriate, failed areas of the pavement are repaired, and the existing pavement receives a 2.5 inch overlay of asphalt concrete. Improvement of portions of the above streets remaining under the jurisdiction of Riverside County will require the approval of that agency. 2. Jefferson Street and 62nd Avenue adjacent to development - Improvement section as determined by approved Jefferson Street alignment study. The applicant shall construct half -width street improvements for all frontage (full width for frontage on both sides). Half -width improvements shall include one 16-foot lane on the unimproved side of the road and provision of security for the applicant's share of future raised medians where required. 3. Madison Street adjacent to development - (Primary Arterial, 86 feet curb to curb with 18- foot median) - The applicant shall construct half -width street improvements for all frontage (full width for frontage on both sides). Half -width improvements shall include one 16-foot lane on the unimproved side of the road and provision of security for the applicant's share of future raised median. 4. Pro -rats participation in any traffic signals required by the approved plans or which become necessary at access points. Additional improvement widths may be necessary for bus turnouts, accelerationideceleration lanes and/or other features contained in the approved construction plans. B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CULS DE SAC 1. Residential - 36-feet wide if double loaded (buildings on both sides), 32-feet if single loaded. 2. Collector (Z300 homes or 3,000 vpd) - 40-feet wide. 67. All streets proposed for residential or other access drives shall be designed and constructed with curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas. 68. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted to locations shown on the "'Circulation" diagram of the specific plan. CONAPRVL.149 12 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 • Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 69. Prior to occupancy of completed buildings within the development, the applicant shall install traffic control devices and street name signs along access roads to those buildings. LANDSCAPING 70. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback areas or lots along Jefferson Street, 62nd Avenue and Madison Street. 71. 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. 72. 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. 73. Slopes shall not exceed 3:1 in perimeter setbacks, medians and other publicly- or commonly - maintained landscape areas. 74. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins and park areas shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment. 75. The applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 76. Prior to approval of building permits the applicant shall prepare a water conservation plan which shall include consideration of: A. Methods to minimize the consumption of water, including water saving features incorporated into the design of the structures, the use of drought tolerant and low-water usage landscaping materials, and programs to increase the effectiveness of landscape and golf course irrigation, as recommended by CVWD and the State Department of Water Resources. B. Methods for maximizing groundwater recharge, including the construction of groundwater recharge facilities. C. Methods for minimizing the amount of water used for on -site irrigation, including the use of reclaimed water from sewage treatment facilities. The water energy plan shall be subject to review and acceptance by CVWD prior to final approval by the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.149 13 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 • Travertine Corporation March 28, 1995 77. The existing trees on the site shall be incorporated into the landscape plan wherever feasible. A tree retention plan shall be submitted to staff as part of the final landscape plan and prior to any site grading. 78. Applicant/developer shall submit a typical landscape plan for all golf course landscaping, which shall be designated to feature drought tolerant plant species, and the latest water conserving irrigation technology. The plan(s) shall be subject to initial review by the Planning Commission, with subsequent final review and acceptance by CVWD prior to landscape construction. Evidence of CVWD acceptance shall be submitted to the Community Development Department. 79. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planning materials shall be required for at least 90% of non -golf course planting areas. Provisions shall also be made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby wildlife. 80. The applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the CVWD for review and approval with respect to the District's Water Management Program. PUBLI SERVICES - FIRE MARSHAL: 81. All water mains and fire hydrants providing the required fire flows shall be constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code in effect at the time of development. 82. The level of service required for this project shall be aligned with the criteria for Category II -Urban as outlined in the Fire Protection Master Plan and as follows: A. Fire station located within three miles. B. Receipt of full "first alarm" assignment within 15 minutes. Impacts to the Fire Department are generally due to the increased number due to the increased number of emergency and public service calls generated by additional buildings and human population. A Fiscal analysis for this project shall identify a funding source to mitigate any impacts associated with any capitol costs and the annual operating costs necessary for an increased level of service. Said analysis shall be subject to review and approval by the Riverside County Fire Department and the City of La Quinta. COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT: 83. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the CVWD as stated in the District's letter dated December 281994, attached to these Conditions of Approval. During project development all irrigation facilities shall be designed to utilize reclaimed water sources when such sources become available. ELECTRICAL UTILITIES: CONAPRVL.149 14 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 84 The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Imperial Irrigation District as stated in the District's letter dated November 15,1994, attached to these Conditions of Approval. SCHOOLS: 85. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Coachella Valley Unified School District, as stated in the District's letter dated November 16,1994, attached to these Conditions of Approval. RECREATION: 86. Prior to any final map approval by the City Council, the applicant shall meet the parkland dedication requirements as set forth in Section 13.24.030, La Quinta Municipal Code and in compliance with the goals and policies of the La Quinta Parks and Recreation Master Plan. PUBLIC TRANSIT: 87 The applicant shall provide public transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit and/or the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 88. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 89. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers; geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have his or her agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings and certify compliance of all work with approved plans, specifications and applicable codes. 90. 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. MAINTENANCE 91. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of landscaping and related improvements in landscaped setbacks, retention basins and other public or common areas until those areas have been accepted for maintenance by a homeowner's association (developments with private and/or gated interior streets) or the City's Landscape and Lighting District (developments without private or gated interior streets). The applicant shall maintain all other improvements until final acceptance, by the City Council, of all improvements within each map or phase. CONAPRVL.149 15 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94.026 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 92. The applicant shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet for streets, landscaping and related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, or any other improvements to be maintained by an HOA. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the HOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance. FEES AND DEPOSITS 93. 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 the plan checks and permits. 94. 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 all costs of the reapportionment. 95. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the following: "Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the Community Development Department with written clearance from the DSUSD stating that the per -unit impact fees have been paid." 96. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $850.00 plus $78.00 for the Riverside County document processing. The fee shall be paid within 24-hours after review by the City Council. 97. The applicant shall pay all fees and deposits required by the City for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee and deposit amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the City. MISCELLANEOUS 98. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination system (NPDES) and the City's NPDES permit. 99. If the City finds it necessary to revise or abandon the Jefferson Street specific alignment contemplated at the time of approval of this specific plan, the applicant shall revise this specific plan as required by the City to fully address revised access routing. 100. For all open space designated areas that are 20-percent or more in slope, a conservation easement shall be prepared for City review and approval prior to recordation with the County Recorder's Office. CONAPRVL.149 16 ATTACHMENT #i EIR DISTRIBUTION LIST City of La Quinta City Manager Engineering/Public Works Building & Safety Parks & Recreation Fire Marshal Sheriff's Department City Attorney Community Development Director Principal Planner (2) Associate Planner (3) Planning Commissioners (7) City Council (5) Responsible Agencies:, Chamber of Commerce: La Quinta Library Imperial Irrigation District Southern California Gas Desert Sands Unified School District Coachella Valley Unified School District Bureau of Land Management Waste Management U S Postal Service General Telephone Colony Cable Sunline Transit Coachella Valley Archaeological Society Building Industry Association - Desert Council City of Indio City of Coachella Coachella Valley Mountain Conservancy Coachella Valley Recreation & Parks U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Riverside County Planning Department Riverside County Environmental Health Coachella Valley Association of Governments Torres -Martinez Tribal Council U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Desert Riders NO George Meyer - COD State Fish & Game Soil Conservation Service Sierra Club Army Corp SCAQMD County Regional Park Agency ATTACHMENT #8 tA t tV, "IL La Qv1,4c, -Plonnn COMMIT'Qn NT #'8 MAR 2 2 1995 mmmm.wt.Tww—.�vc^n :mac 1 Ci i�/0i' LA V. INTA PIA'JNI&13' DEPARTMENT ` QtCh 21� l q `�5 1-he,- ate. my eOVIce.r,n5 te�arLA%A'� -the. TroPoSed Ta.w ti �ro;ect: (D Wa�er - and Q 00X, - The da. J� ,re.ce6,Jed_ Qn arAicle, cbou: -le 'C,oaehellaValley Wak(Tis�64's concern '�ot mee�;+�� the deMancj 1o' r Woo. er, to li l;k ol1 t4►is hew Gan e.� oka'i -Ihi s Prv�ec� n&recA ZmQac� Zk),ij q . 3 ,, ab�� potei4ial wales' de J,rLtCtC61 ') dui to ,dew wills urban run cad �ett.lizer ofphed +0 yW cout5e.s , 4 1-- li a mile, Souih east 4w p� o;e`ct I. am Loncetne cl �or m..� water 5 a?Ply , WhD w , li flock -fie. b i 11 i� wz need k Jc-a Fe.r will or -L�\e- W04e-r �Ual i � VAc,--L'7`, is Hat � int,Z c{ p 1,n 5 11� Inle4c �t , .-It'5 p:;(< oi- my flamtty'5 ;o Ake- moQ4ctIA5 l„d C.a yon5 Jaie5 back 4-o 10'5 whe.-t my yo,-J Paieto 4JAe �j�llt Valley, -1hz N1ei�Hfw z -�R31-k SiIA(F- has been c< TcImily �u��a'I i-I 1�15o �u.l'5 Cyn, neli Ae 130,1 Hdt'6a;L �a M(Alnez Flom in ' elC, Kark,-, Kcn, to b- park off- our' back yQr��. ma's u54Yaii'x� +o rne, l:haE- .S,n"\ not able to share. 4e-5•,- placc5 w14,my ch�ldie,� �'u 5e jack a� 42cce5S , I S ask youl,-� e5 11,;cc, tkai �o6c. �e.ne4LA4i an5 hQ� 4in oypo(�v 1 y -�co en3py -me. mvuntc nls . Am -A ha w; � -�I I' W�CY�ou{- aLc.cG55? JAnck 7-,m n� rneaninct acce55 by Klki g one or Iwo c j4- +o where. fie- hike Sho uW 5 t,V L , �'e�L i� would be priaie- 6 fequ,ite. -�- 6LA-i Zane- beLxen -6base o the ° 5 i -Ae'' cx,nd hovvv-5 , 1x15L-aa o¢ allowln) hc)rne5 4o be b ILL , ,�4 .zt- -Ihe bc-z , L',145 v 5 , 5�-4(5 Of\ ek aa1k, m5NC m� �timi�.� like-,5 eI'Qj -the. beauty oc ;bte nlc h� SKy . �'m inl�ing �ha� all the I iih+5 f�a� ame w'� 4h 4 %e�k oc lh; 5_ s 2 e would Pub - do,mpe-r >n -tiA1 5 -Thar� you +off 'heat �_nm 5ti Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-028 - Travertine Corporation March 28,1995 related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, or any other improvements to be maintained by an HOA. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the SOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance. FEES AND DEPOSITS 93. 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 the plan checks and permits. 94. 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 all costs of the reapportionment. 95. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the following: "Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the Community Development Department with written clearance from the DSUSD stating that the per -unit impact fees have been paid." 96. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $850.00 plus $78.00 for the Riverside County document processing. The fee shall be paid within 24-hours after review by the City Council. 97. The applicant shall pay all fees and deposits required by the City for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee and deposit amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the City. MISCELLANEOUS 98. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination system (NPDES) and the City's NPDES permit. 99. If the City finds it necessary to revise or abandon the Jefferson Street specific alignment contemplated at the time of approval of this specific plan, the applicant shall revise this specific plan as required by the City to fully address revised access routing. 100. For all open space designated areas that are 20-percent or more in slope, a conservation easement shall be prepared for City review and approval prior to recordation with the County Recorder's Office. 101. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer(s) shall enter into negotiations toward a Mitigation Agreement to the mutual and reasonable satisfaction of the City of La Quinta, CVUSD and the developer. CONHRVL.149 16 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA MARCH 14,1995 I. CALL TO ORDER 4:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 4:03 P.M. by Chairman Adolph. Commissioner Barrows led the flag salute. II. ROLL CALL A. Chairman Adolph requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Anderson, Barrows, Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, and Chairman Adolph B. Staff Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer III. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None IV. BUSINESS SESSION: A. Workshop on the La Quinta Zoning Ordinance Update; a request of the City for a review of the Zoning Ordinance Update. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa gave a brief review of the sections that would be reviewed and introduced Larry Lawrence, Lawrence Associates who gave an opening statement as to why the update was taking place and an overview of the Draft Ordinance. 2. Commissioner Gardner asked why we were referring to the Update as a Code. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that the proper procedure was to adopt a change to the Municipal Code by Ordinance, but it is a part of the Municipal Code. 3. Mr. Lawrence went through the different sections and explained how the Draft Zoning Ordinance was arranged. 4. Commissioner Butler asked the consultant if the terms being used were the current terms and the current terminology to be used. Mr. Lawrence stated it would be. PC3-14 Planning Commission Meeting March 14,1995 5. Commissioner Butler asked if there would be a new zoning map showing these changes. Staff stated there would be a new map with the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance Update. 6. Commissioner Gardner asked if the document would be user-friendly and would the language used be uniform throughout the State. Mr. Lawrence stated zoning codes are different from City to City and each is unique. However, most cities are going to this type of format. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that where an area is controlled by State Law, those areas would be similar. Zoning is completely under local control and therefore has its own uniqueness. 7. Commissioner Anderson stated that the overall format is not typical but the information is similar and easily attainable. A laymen may have difficulty but the professional should be able to understand it. Discussion followed. 8. Mr. Tom Davis, Tierra Planning and Design, explained his firm was working jointly with Lawrence Associates on the Update and therefore should be as close as possible to industry standards. Mr. Lawrence was familiar with various zoning codes, and has dealt with development standards and together they brought expertise in both areas. He further explained that this document implements the General Plan. 9. Chairman Adolph asked if they would be required to update the General Plan so they both agree. Staff stated they would not be necessary as the Zoning Ordinance was written to implement the General Plan and therefore there should be no conflicts. 10. Commissioner Gardner asked what the Commission would have to do if there was an area in conflict. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that public hearings would have to be held to amend the General Plan. It is very likely that as the City uses the Ordinance Update, there will be areas that may need to change. 11. Commissioner Anderson stated he felt there should be a section that defines what the lot coverage is including the garage, as well as livable floor space. There needs to be very definite definitions as to what lot coverage is and what livable floor space is. 12. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell asked that Section 9.10.060 be eliminated as it was contained within another part of the Municipal Code. PC3-14 2 Planning Commission Meeting March 14,1995 13. Chairman Adolph stated that Section 9.10.010(C) did not mention anything about traffic or infrastructure. Staff explained this will be handled in the subdivision Ordinance. Chairman Adolph asked why it was not applicable to this section. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that it is included in the General Plan and the General Plan has different elements such as the Transportation Element. Discussion followed regarding Open Space definition and whether or not it was adequately covered. Following discussion, the consultants were instructed to add a #10 to Section 9.10.10(C) to add something about the "natural beauty of the hillside". 14. Chairman Adolph questioned the verbiage of Section 9.10.020 and asked whether the word "control" shouldn't be used. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained what the proper usage would be. She further stated this was a laymens statement of a legal statement. 15. Commissioner Anderson stated that Page 4 Section 9.10.080 was the logical place to have a statement regarding lot coverage and livable space. Mr. Lawrence stated there was a chapter on definitions and it was more appropriate there. 16. Mr. Lawrence pointed out an editorial note on Page 6 and explained its purpose. 17. Commissioner Newkirk stated there was a PD Zoning on the map, but it was not listed under 9.20.010. Staff stated it should be added. 18. Commissioner Gardner asked what AB Zoning was? Staff explained it was Adult Business and explained what it consisted of. 19. Chairman Adolph asked what Section B on Page 7 referred to. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained this was a safety valve for areas where the zoning lines were not definitely defined. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that should someone not agree with staff, they could appeal the decision to the Planning Commission and City Council. 20. Chairman Adolph asked if Section 9.20.030(A) could be written with more clarity. It needed to be simplified. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained what the section meant. Mr. Lawrence stated it was intended to give the Planning Commission more flexibility in setting requirements within each zoning district. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that along the toe of the mountain you want the setback to be more because of slides, etc. This section would allow the City to require additional setbacks. Discussion followed. Commissioners asked that the section be written in a more simplified manner. PC3.14 3 Planning Commission Meeting March 14,1995 21. Chairman Adolph stated he felt that a sentence should be added to Page 8, Section 9.20.040 stating "free of all encumbrances". Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained this section was used to give the Director authority to deal with uses that were similar but not specifically mentioned. Discussion followed. 22. Commissioner Abels asked if flat roofs could be banned. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated this was addressed in the Building Code. Commissioner Anderson explained that typically there are no flat roofs, they all have a slight pitch. 23. Chairman Adolph asked that in Section 9.30.010(D) more verbiage could be added regarding shade structures and give some flexibility to the applicant. Chairman Adolph asked that a sentence be added regarding shade structures being required on the south and west elevations for glass areas larger than 16 square feet. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated some flexibility could be added. Principal Planner Stan Sawa stated the Planning Commission had previously required overhangsishade structures for certain glass areas of a certain size. 24. Commissioner Barrows stated this section was specifically addressing an eave or window. If a sentence was added it would need to be consistent and have flexibility. There should be overhangs on the entire building, in addition to the south and west exposure and some type of alternate shading device for any window over a certain size. Discussion followed. 27. Commissioners discussed setbacks and development standards. Commissioners Barrows/Anderson moved to recess at 5:47 P.M. Unanimously approved. The Planning Commission reconvened at 7:02 P.M. Chairman Adolph called the meeting to order. There being no public comment nor any public hearings, Chairman Adolph introduced the Business Session item. BUSINESS SESSION: A. Plot Plan 95-549, a request of Vintage Homes for approval of a plot plan application to allow modification of a recreation lot at Lake La Quinta. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained within the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. PC3.14 4 Planning Commission Meeting March 14,1995 Following discussion, staff stated the consultants would work on the problem and report back at next meeting. 4. Commissioner Anderson asked if Section 9.30.040(D) (Page 3) required an addition to a house to comply with the Zoning Ordinance. What if they were reroofing or adding a room. Staff stated that a section would need to be added requiring existing or remodeled structures to be compatible with the existing structure. 5. Chairman Adolph asked for clarification as to where the restricted area for the height of a building was measured from in Section 9.30.010(E). Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated it was measured from the right-of-way of the street. Chairman Adolph stated this needed to be added. 6. Commissioner Anderson asked for clarification on Section 9.30.060(C) regarding the minimum project size for apartment projects. Mr. Lawrence clarified and stated he would add verbiage to clarify. 7. Chairman Adolph asked what happens in the common open areas when the open space abuts an existing residential area; how close can they be? Mr. Lawrence stated the common open area has to be interior to the project and went on to explain. 8. Commissioner Adolph asked the consultant to explain what a "base district" was. Mr. Lawrence stated this was the initial zoning placed on the land except for the PD Zoning. The PD and RR are overlay zones and add additional requirements opportunities. Mr. Davis, representing Tierra Planning and Design, went on to explain the item. 9. Mr. Lawrence asked the Commissioners to correct the chart on Page 9 to show that the approval process for large daycare centers would be done by the Director. Commissioner Anderson questioned whether or not the application should come to the Planning Commission. Principal Planner Stan Sawa explained that each case is noticed to everyone within 100-feet of the project and if anyone objects, then it is brought to the Planning Commission. 10. Commissioners discussed with the consultant and staff, a. Areas ;in which guest houses are allowed; b. Mobilehome parks and subdivisions zoning; C. Setbacks for structures; d. Revise the location of the Energy Conservation Design Requirements; e. How close you could build up to an easement; PCS-14 6 Planning Commission Meeting March 14,1995 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Anderson/Newkirk to adjourn this meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting on March 28, 1995. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:24 P.M., March 14,1995. PC3.14 7