Loading...
2007 01 23 PC�4 Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-guinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION IT ► o A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California JANUARY 23, 2007 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2007-002 Beginning Minute Motion 2006-001 CALL TO ORDER A. Flag Salute B. Pledge of Allegiance C. Roll Call II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 9, 2007. GAWPDOCSTC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc V. PUBLIC HEARING: For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time. Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public hearing. A. Item ................ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-579, SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-081, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 23060, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-873 Applicant......... Laing Luxury Homes Location........... Northwest corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48 (extended) Request ........... Consideration of development standards and guidelines for the development of 74 single-family homes, subdivision of 28.33 acres into 74 residential lots as well as lots for private streets, retention basins, open space and recreation, and a site development permit to allow the construction of 74 single-family residential homes Action .............. Resolution 2007-_, Resolution 2007-, Resolution 2007- , Resolution 2007- B. Item ................ STREET VACATION 2006-043 Applicant......... Nispero Properties, Inc. Location........... Main Street north of Avenida La Fonda Request .......... Report of Findings under California Government Code Section 65402 that the proposed vacation of a portion of a public utility easement within Desert Club Tract, Unit 4 is consistent with the General Plan Action ............. Resolution 2007- VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item ................... NOTICE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE CASE NO 2006-5204 Appellants....,..... Jeffrey S. and Ardis L. Manning Location .............. 52-715 Avenida Navarro Request ............. Appeal of a Public Nuisance Determination regarding the violation of a recreational vehicle encroaching on the City right-of-way without a permit, parking in a location not zoned for vehicular parking, being improperly stored on a G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\? AgendaMdoc residential property and a patio cover that violates the exterior side yard setback Action ................ To be continued to February 13, 2007 B. Item .................. SIGN APPLICATION 2006-1073 Applicant............ Ultrasigns Electrical Advertising Location.............. North side of Highway 111, west of Adams Street,. within the One -Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center Request .............. Consideration of a business identification sign for PETCO Action ................. Minute Motion 2007- C. Item .................. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE — RIVERSIDE COUNTY SOI-R-02 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34536 (COUNTY APPLICATION) Applicant............ Joe Birdsell Location.............. Southwest corner of Darby Road and Adams Street Request .............. Planning Commission review and comment on a project proposed in the City's North Sphere of Influence Action ................. Minute Motion 2007- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None Vlll. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Minor Use Permit process discussion B. Review of City Council meeting of January 16, 2007 IX. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on February 13, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, January 23, 2007, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, on Friday, January 19, 2007. DATED: January 19, 2007 4T *da ve Secretary Cityuinta, California G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc Public Notices The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at 777-7123, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's office at 777-7123. A one (1) week notice is required. If background material is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00 p.m. meeting. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaMdoc MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 9, 2007 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was reconvened at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Quill who asked Commissioner Alderson to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners. Ed Alderson, Katie Barrows, Rick Daniels, Jim Engle, and Chairman Paul Quill. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, Planning Manager Les Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Assistant Planner Jay Wuu, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Street Vacation of a Portion of Public Utility Easement located within Desert Club Tract Unit 4; a request of the City to vacate a potion of Main Street north of Avenida La Fonda for Nispero Properties. 1. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Staff asked that the item be continued to allow staff time to notify all the adjacent property owners. 2. There being no questions, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Daniels/Barrows to continue Street Vacation 2006-043 to January 23, 2007. B. Site Development Permit 2006-877; a request of Adobe Holdings, Inc. for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for four prototypical residential plans and common areas for the Village at Coral Mountain located within Tract 31249 on the south side of avenue 58, '/I mile west of Madison Street. - G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2007\1-9-06.doc Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2007 1 . Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner Jay Wuu presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Engle asked if the occupants of the two-story units would they be able to see in the backyards of the adjacent tract. Planning Manager Les Johnson stated no and explained the orientation of the units in relation to the adjacent project. Discussion followed regarding the orientation of the units. 3. Commissioner Barrows asked about the water calculations in regard to the water features. Staff stated it met the requirements. 4. Commissioner Alderson asked if the water features at the entrance were separate pools. Staff stated they were separate. Commissioner Alderson stated the plan does not show the units identified on the lots. He also asked for clarification on whether or not the second access was an entrance. Staff stated that it was an exit only. Commissioner Alderson asked about the third "garage" and "pool house". Staff clarified the "pool house" will not be used as a living quarters and each unit does have a separate casita. 5. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Bob Rippe, representing the applicant, gave a brief history of the project. 6: Commissioner Alderson asked if the trims were to be all the same. Mr. Ed Rippe, Project Manager, stated this is still being determined. 7. Commissioner Barrows stated she would like to see the water features reduced or one eliminated. Mr. Jose Estrada, landscape architect, stated they have received approval from CVWD because of the amount of drought tolerant plant material they were using. They did eliminate one pond from the southwest portion of the site. Commissioner Barrows asked if there would be any problem with eliminating one of the water features. Mr. Estrada explained the importance of the water features to the project. ►J Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2007 8. Commissioner Engle asked how much water they would hold. Mr. Estrada stated he did not have those figures. 9. Commissioner Daniels asked what alternative they would use, if they did not have the water features. Mr. Estrada made some suggestions. 10. Chairman Quill suggested the pools be reduced and concentrated on the west side to reduce the costs and amount of water to be used. 11. Commissioner Alderson stated he did not have an objection to the front water feature and would suggest the elimination of the interior lake. Mr. Rippe stated they have eliminated any turf in the retention basins and added the water feature to create an interest at the entry. They do not have the draw of a golf course and the lakes are a feature for this project. 12. There being no further discussion or other public comment, Chairman Quill closed the public participation portion of the hearing. 13. Commissioner Alderson asked if the precise grading plan would come to the Commission. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated no. 14. Commissioner Barrows stated she would like to see one of the water features eliminated even though they have made great effort to use drought tolerate material. 15. Commissioner Daniels stated he too compliments the applicant on the amount of drought tolerant material, but believes a water feature could be eliminated or reduced. 16. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Alderson/Engle to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007-001 approving Site Development Permit 2006- 877, as recommended and amended: a. Condition 26. Any residential units built on the southern and eastern project boundaries of Site Development Permit 2006-078 shall be constructed in accordance with the specific unit plans identified in said Site Development U Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2007 Permit, and subsequent precise 'grading plans. Any changes or modifications to the approved units shall require Planning Commission approval. b.. Condition added: The applicant shall work with staff to eliminate or reduce the water features. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Barrows, Daniels, Engle, and Chairman Quill. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEM: A. Image , Corridor Determination; a request of the City for a determination on applicability of Image Corridor Development Standards in the Special Purpose Districts. 1. Chairman Quill asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Les Johnson presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Quill asked why this was before the Commission. Staff explained how the proposed La Quinta Country Club clubhouse plans brought this to the City's attention. 3. Commissioner Alderson asked if there were any other locations where else this could occur. Staff stated none that are known currently. The Country Club could request a variance to their specific plan, but staff was bringing it before the Commission for their direction. 4. Chairman Quill stated it is a non -issue to him and would agree with establishing the height limit as it is in other areas. Staff confirmed the Country Club would be able to obtain the changes by virtue of their specific plan. The purpose of the .amendment is for consistency. 5. There being no,further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Barrows to direct staff to move forward with the amendment. Unanimously approved. Vill. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: El Planning Commission Minutes January 9, 2007 A. Commissioner Barrows gave a report of the City Council meeting of December 19, 2006. B. Community Development Director Doug Evans informed the Commission of a workshop with the Vista Santa Rosa Task Force on Wednesday, January 10, 2007, at 2:00 p.m. . C. Staff informed the Commission that Principal Planner Fred Baker had resigned to take a position in Apache Junction as a Planning Manager. His last day would be January 19, 2007. D. Commissioner Barrows asked staff to update the Commission on the Dark Sky Ordinance. Staff explained the process that had taken place and that the Lighting Ordinance was being revised to make it easier to implement and interpret. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Daniels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on January 23, 2007. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. on January 9, 2007. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California G PH #A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 23, 2007 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-579 SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-081 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 35060 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-873 APPLICANT: LAING LUXURY HOMES REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENTSTANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 74 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES; THE SUBDIVISION OF 28.33 ACRES INTO 74 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, AS WELL AS LOTS FOR PRIVATE STREETS, RETENTIONS BASINS, OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION; AND A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF 74 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS. LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND AVENUE 48 (EXTENDED). PROPERTY OWNER: LAING LUXURY HOMES GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWED THIS PROJECT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), AND HAS PREPARED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006- 579 FOR THIS PROJECT, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT, AS CONDITIONED, THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND THEREFORE, IS RECOMMENDING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE CERTIFIED. SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: VACANT LAND, ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI CHURCH PARKING AREA SOUTH: LAGUNA DE LA PAZ EAST: WASHINGTON STREET, WALGREEN'S, MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL WEST: VACANT LAND, SANTA ROSA MOUNTAINS BACKGROUND: Several projects have previously been proposed for the 28.33 acre project site located on the west side of Washington Street adjacent to and north of the Laguna De La Paz residential neighborhood. The improvements currently on the property were permitted through a Specific Plan and Site Development Permit approved for the La Quinta Arts Foundation. In 2004, Foxx Homes proposes a tentative tract map (No. 32397) on the property, which was approved, but not developed. If approved, the current proposal will supercede previous approvals. PROJECT REQUEST: The proposed project consists of three components 1. A Specific Plan establishing development standards and guidelines for a residential community consisting of 74 single-family residential units, open space, recreation and retention areas on 28.33 acres. 2. A Tentative Tract Map to subdivide the 28.33 acres into 74 single-family lots, as well as lots for streets, open space, recreation, and retention basins. 3. A Site Development Permit to approve the architecture and layout of the 74 units, and implement the Specific Plan. Access to the project will be from Washington Street. The main entrance will be at the location of the existing entry previously constructed by the La Quinta Arts Foundation, which is located in the center of the site. A secondary access will also be constructed at the northeastern corner of the site, also connecting to Washington Street (future signal) and will be a joint access shared with Saint Francis of Assisi Church. Specific Plan and Site Development Permit The Specific Plan defines the development standards and guidelines for the proposed project. The Specific Plan allows for the development of 74 single-family units, divided into 25 "Hacienda" units and 49 "Bungalow" units. The Hacienda units are proposed to be located along the southern and western property boundaries. The Bungalow units will be located in the center of the site. In addition to the residential lots, the Specific Plan proposes a central park area (0.47 acres), as well as a park at the entrance to the site, located just inside the wall (0.18 acres). In addition, the adjacent retention area (1.65 acres) will also provide walking trails for resident use. The development standards for each unit type are summarized below (page 33 of the Specific Plan provides a complete listing of all development standards). Summary of Development Standards Standard "Hacienda" Units 'Bungalow" Units City Standards Minimum lot size (s.f.) 10,320 6,290 7,200 Maximum height (ft.) 28 28 28 Maximum number of stories 1 2 2 Minimum front setback (ft.) 15 to building/ 20 to garage 5 20 Minimum rear setback (ft.) 1 10 1 5 20 Maximum lot coverage 1%) 1 50 1 60 50 The architectural style for the project is Spanish Colonial. The Hacienda units will range in size from 3,700 to 4,100 square feet, and are to be single story. Three floor plans are proposed, with two elevations per plan. Tile roofs, sand stucco walls with adobe brick accents, tile and ornamental wrought iron are proposed for each of the plans. The Bungalow units are proposed to range in size from 2,392 to 3,207 square feet. These units include six floor plans, two of which are to be two stories in height, with two elevations for each floor plan. The materials and finishes proposed for the Bungalow units are similar to those proposed for the Hacienda units. The Specific Plan allows for "guest suites" in addition to the bedrooms in each home (please see further discussion under "Analysis," below). A loop road is proposed through the center of the site. Interior streets are to be 56 feet in right-of-way width with a pavement width of 36 feet. This pavement width will allow for parking on both sides, narrowing at several "chokers" (bulb -outs into the street used for traffic calming) to 28 feet, with no parking allowed in those locations. The exception is street "E", which is proposed to have a pavement width of 28 feet where chokers are proposed, with parking only being provided on one side of the street. The entry drives are both proposed to be 36 feet in pavement width. In addition to the project roadways, access to the Bungalow lots will be via shared driveways, 24 feet in pavement width, which will serve four units each. Although the proposed chicanes reduce some of the area available for on -street parking, an analysis was completed by the applicant, which demonstrates that sufficient parking is available outside the chicane areas to accommodate all project parking. Pedestrian "paseos" are provided through the tract, located in an east -west fashion between the Bungalow units, connecting to trails in the retention basins, as well as to the sidewalk on Washington Street (please see additional discussion under "Analysis," below). Landscaping is proposed to be of a drought tolerant nature, and will be consistent throughout the project. Trees include, but are not limited to, California Pepper, Palo Verde, Mesquite, varieties of Acacia and Desert Ironwood. Perimeter landscape setbacks along Washington Street are a minimum of 150 feet in depth; averaging 20 feet on the north and south project boundaries; and varying from 15 to 85 feet along the western property boundary. A perimeter wall is also proposed around the entire site (please see additional discussion under "Analysis," below). The western boundary of the project also includes an open space lot, Lot A, which provides for retaining walls and a transition to the permanent open space located adjacent to the west of the site. The retaining walls are proposed as a series of 3 tiers which will provide erosion control and drainage in this area. The design of the walls is discussed further under "Analysis," below. ANALYSIS: In reviewing the Specific Plan, several issues have arisen which merit further review, and which " have resulted in specific conditions of approval. These issue areas are discussed individually below. General Plan/Zoning Having a gross density of 2.6 units per acre, the proposed single family residential development is consistent with the density provisions of the Low Density Residential land use and zoning provisions, which allow for up to 4 units per acre. However, the applicant is requesting, via the Specific Plan, relief from certain development standards, such as minimum lot size, front and rear yard setbacks, and lot coverage. Most of the requested relief to standards will apply to the bungalow, lots. This will create a more intimate setting that relies upon strong architectural and site design. Staff believes that the proposed site design combined with the architecture will create an environment that supports the requested relief. The front yard setback proposed by the applicant for the Haciendas is at 15 feet. This does not provide adequate space for standard vehicles to park in front of the garage. Therefore, staff has included a condition of approval requiring the Specific Plan be amended and Site Development Permit conditioned to allow the Hacienda units to have a 15 foot front yard setback except for garages parallel with the street which must have a 20 foot front yard setback. Guest Suites The original Specific Plan includes an allowance for up 3 "guest suites" per lot, for any of the lots. The guest suites are defined in the Specific Plan as "a detached or attached unit with sleeping and sanitary facilities and limited food preparation facilities (kitchenette/wet bar service)..." Although not included inthedefinition, the other identifying feature of the guest suites is that they have separate entrances and are not directly accessible to the main house. Most of the separate entrances are "linked" via a covered walkway or courtyard. The Bungalow plans show up to two guest suites per plan on the two story units, and one guest suite per plan for the one story units. The Haciendas show 1 guest suite per plan. No units are shown to include three guest suites even though the Specific Plan is requesting this. Staff had a concern that the guest suites, because of their independence from the main house, and their self-contained nature, could be considered multiple units in a single family home neighborhood. Although it is staff's understanding that the applicant wishes to develop a high -end, single family residential product, the entitlement, provided by the Specific Plan is tied to the land, not the applicant. If approved as proposed, the entitlement could allow three guest suites per lot regardless of the project proposed. This has the potential to affect project design, parking, and other issues relating to multiple units. To additionally complicate the issue, the Uniform Building Code considers a single family, home any grouping of rooms connected by a covered or open walkway, sidewalk, or an enclosed hallway. Therefore, should the project be amended, the Building Code provisions do not provide the City with protection. Staff discussed the issue with the applicant, who has recently proposed an amendment to the Specific Plan language that changes the definition for guest suites and limits the maximum number of such units to 2 for the Bungalows and 1 for the Haciendas (Attachment 6). Staff has included a condition of approval requiring the Specific Plan be amended and Site Development Permit conditioned to only allow one guest suite with a kitchenette per lot. Passive Open Space and Retention Basins The proposed project includes two private recreation areas: one central to the Bungalow Units, one immediately south of the project's main entry. In addition, retention basins are proposed along the entire frontage of the project on Washington Street that will provide access through trails which connect to the interior walkways. Although enhanced landscaping is proposed for these areas, and an arbor with seating is shown in the Specific Plan for the central park, no recreational amenities are proposed for any of the park areas. Given that the trails extend throughout the site, and that their use is likely by a variety of types of users, staff feels that the addition of amenities is required to make these areas functional for the residents. A condition of approval is proposed for both the Specific Plan and the Site Development Permit which would require the inclusion of seating along the trails at intervals of no more than 200 feet and an active recreation amenity in the central park. Main Entry As currently designed, the main entry presents a strong aesthetic statement for the project. However, this design only provides for a limited turning radius, which will be difficult for larger delivery vehicles that require a large turning radius. In addition, the tower feature located just south of the drive proposes a maximum height of 28 feet. The tower setback is approximately 95 feet from the Washington Street property line, which is within the 150 foot image corridor setback. The applicant has requested relief in the Specific Plan from the 22-foot maximum height requirement. Paseos or Pedestrian Paths A series of paseos are proposed between the Bungalow lots, which will provide pedestrian access throughout the project. The paseos are shown as a 4 foot walkway within a minimum 11 foot wide landscaped area. These lead to a looped trail within the retention basins, and also connect to the sidewalk along Washington Street. No provision has been made on the tract map, however, for access 'easement where paseos are to be located. Thus, the paseos are not separate lots, and without easements could be blocked by land owners who would be within their rights to restrict access. A condition of approval has been added to the tract map which requires easements be provided between the appropriate lots to assure the long term viability of the paseos. Perimeter Wall and Landscape Design 1. A six foot high perimeter wall is proposed around the entire project. On the Washington Street 'frontage, this wall is proposed in sections approximately 120 feet in lengths and to be located on top of a 6 foot berm, resulting in a 12 foot high barrier along the entire frontage. The wall is to be set back from the property line a staggered distance of 20 to 31 feet. The impact of a 12 foot high wall on Washington Street is considered by staff to be in excess for this location, which is a primary image corridor for the community, and is much higher than the adjacent Laguna'De La Paz perimeter wall. Staff has recommended a condition of approval which restricts the combined wall and berm height to no greater than 8 feet, and be required to undulate vertically along the project frontage. Additionally, the proposed Washington Street perimeter wall design presents a long linear image and needs to have visual relief. A condition of approval is included which requires the installation of pilasters at each of the wall openings, and in the center of each 100 foot section on the Washington Street frontage. A series of retaining walls are proposed at the base of the sand dune on the western property boundary. Three tiers of retaining walls extend approximately 450 feet and act as erosion control and drainage way for storm flows coming down the mountainsides. The tiers extend to a height of 28 feet, and will generally be blocked from view on Washington Street by the intervening homes. However, the areas between tiers are narrow, with only a four foot width, and steep, with a 2:1 slope, and will not allow sufficient space for landscaping and may be subject to moderate to severe erosion. Since landscaping will be integral to the softening of the retaining walls for views from neighboring lots, a condition of approval is included which requires the re -design of these walls to include additional landscaping, a 6 foot horizontal separation, and a maximum 3:1 slope in areas where trees and large shrubs are proposed. The applicant has reported to staff that they have been working with the Laguna De La Paz homeowners association regarding the proposed wall and landscaping treatment along the south property line. The applicant has reported that the HOA is supportive of the design and will be corresponding accordingly. However, staff has yet to receive any correspondence from the HOA confirming this. Tentative Tract Map The Tentative Tract Map implements the Specific Plan, and is consistent with it, as amended above. The map includes the subdivision of all the residential lots, and the private streets and open space areas described in the Specific Plan. The Map also includes the design of the northern access point, which will eventually be shared with St. Francis of Assisi Church. The applicant wishes to maintain this as an egress only access point. Staff believes that this should be an access point that accommodates both ingress and egress traffic, particularly with this shared access being designed for a signal at Washington. It should be noted that in order to accommodate two way traffic the existing design will need to be amended in order to meet stacking and turn around requirements, which will impact the current design on the St. Francis of Assisi Church property and may impact lots 73 and 74. In addition, the applicant has yet to provide easement documentation from St. Francis of Assisi Church that confirms the applicant's right to use the adjacent property for the proposed secondary access. Therefore, a condition of approval has been added requiring the applicant to provide an alternate map design excluding the northern . secondary access and provides for a _secondary emergency access connection to Washington Street. This change would likely result in the loss of several lots as it would require a substantial redesign to the stormwater detention area. Finally, the Map implements the drainage improvements required for this project, which are extensive, particularly on the western boundary. Staff had concerns that the slopes required in this area could require encroachment into the dedicated open space lands to the west, and the applicant has modified all plans to assure that there will be no encroachment, and all cuts and fills will occur within the proposed parcel. In addition, the conditions of approval include a requirement for a grading monitor to be on site during earth moving along the western property boundary, to assure that no encroachment occurs. The Map conforms to the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City's subdivision ordinance, as conditioned. ALRC REVIEW: At their January 17, 2007 meeting the ALRC reviewed the proposed development. Discussion focused upon the proposed landscape palette, design treatment to the retaining walls at the west end of the project and the perimeter treatment along the Washington Street frontage. After considerable discussion, the ALRC recommended approval of the Site Development Permit by Minute Motion 2007- 001, subject to incorporation of the following: A Community Development Department application for Final Landscape Plan Check shall be, submitted for final landscaping plans and reviewed by the ALRC with final approval by the Community Development Director. 2. The six foot.tall perimeter wall proposed along north and south property lines shall be measured from the on -site finished grade of the residential lots. Said walls shall be constructed of solid materials that prevent direct views of adjacent properties. 3. The applicant shall redesign the perimeter wall and berming along the Washington Street frontage for a maximum combined height of wall and berming not to exceed 12 feet, of which the wall height shall not exceed six feet and the maximum height shall undulate between 10 and 12 feet. Said wall shall incorporate random pilasters. 4. The applicant shall redesign the three tiered retaining walls. Said retaining walls shall have a curvilinear pattern with additional stepping and design details that integrate the walls with natural elements such as rock outcroppings. Additional trees and large shrubs shall be incorporated into the design to soften the visual impact of the proposed walls. A minimum of six feet between said walls and a maximum slope of 3:1 shall exist in locations where trees and/or large shrubs are proposed. Staff presented a more conservative condition regarding the maximum berm and wall height along Washington Street consistent with the aforementioned in the analysis section of this report. Staff continues to maintain that a maximum combined wall and. berm height of 8 feet is appropriate for this frontage and will transition well with the adjacent perimeter wall for Laguna De La Paz. Staff will provide additional exhibits at the pubic hearing. Public Notice This request was published in the Desert Sun newspaper on January 13, 2007, and mailed to all affected property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the project site as required by Section 9.200.110 of the Zoning Code. To date, no letters have been received. Public Agency Review A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments. All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to recommend approval of this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolutions. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007- recommending to the City Council approval of Environmental Assessment 2006-579. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2006-081. 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007- recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 35060. 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007- recommending to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2006-873. Attachments: 1. Canyon Ridge Specific Plan 2. Tentative Tract Map Exhibits 3. Architectural & Landscaping Exhibits 4. Conceptual Site Sections 5. Applicant Request for Specific Plan Language Amendment Prepared nager PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-081, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 35060 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-873 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-579 LAING LUXURY HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 23`d day of January, 2007 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Laing Luxury Homes for Environmental Assessment2006-579 prepared for Specific Plan 2006-081, Tentative Tract Map 35060 And Site Development Permit 2006-873, located at northwest corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48 (extended): APN 760-240-014 WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending to the City Council certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed applications will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2006-579. 2. The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Potential impacts associated with biological and cultural resources can be mitigated to a less than significant level. The site does not contain significant paleontological resources. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. Mitigation measures are included to assure no impacts to Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. 4. The proposed project does not have the potential, to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals, as Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Environmental Assessment 2006-579 Laing Luxury Homes Adopted: the proposed project supports the long term goals of the General Plan by providing a variety of housing opportunities for City residents. No significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project. The construction of 74 residential units will not have considerable cumulative impacts. The project is consistent with the General Plan, and the potential impacts associated with General Plan build out. 6. The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly. The proposed project has the potential to adversely affect human beings, due to noise impacts. Noise impacts have been addressed through construction of perimeter walls, which will lower the potential for significant impacts to less than significant levels. 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. 8. The Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 2006-579 and said Environmental Assessment reflects the independent judgment of the City. 9. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2006-579 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Mitigation Monitoring Program, attached and on file in the Community Development Department. Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Environmental Assessment 2006-579 Laing Luxury Homes Adopted: 3. That Environmental Assessment 2006-579 reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 23rd day of January, 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: Douglas R. Evans Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California Environmental Checklist Form Project title: Specific.Plan 2006-081, Tentative Tract Map 35060, Site Development Permit 2006-873 2. Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact person and phone number: Les Johnson 760-777-7125 4. Project location: Northwest corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48 (extended) APN: 760-240-014 5. Project sponsoes name and address: Laing Luxury Homes 895 Dove Street, Suite 200 Newport Beach, CA 92660 6. General plan designation: Low Density 7. Zoning: Low Density Residential Residential 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Specific Plan to establish the design standards and guidelines for the development of 74 attached and detached single family homes on 28.33 acres. The Specific Plan also proposes that each lot be permitted one primary residence and 3 guest suites. The total potential units allowable in the Specific Plan is 288. The Specific Plan includes architectural and landscaping design guidelines, as well as infrastructure plans. Two types of housing are proposed: `Haciendas' will include 25 homes on a minimum of 10,320 square foot lots, and 49 `Bungalows' will have minimum 6,290 square foot lots. The Haciendas are proposed to be one-story homes along the southern and western property boundaries, and the Bungalows are proposed to be two stories in the center of the site. The Tentative Tract Map will allow the subdivision of 28.33 acres into 74 residential lots, as well as lots for private streets, retention basins, and open space or recreation lots. The Site Development Permit will allow the construction of the residential units on the subdivided lots. The project will be accessed by a central drive which will be gated. A second access point to Washington Street is being provided at the northeast comer of the site that will be shared with St. Francis of Assisi Church. - CEQA analysis was previously conducted for this site under EA-2004-522. The acreage considered under that environmental assessment is consistent with that currently under review. The layout and product type, as well as design standards, have changed from the Be previous review. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Vacant desert lands, parking lot and St. Francis of Assisi Church (Low Density Residential,) South: Existing single family residential in Laguna de la Paz (Low Density Residential) West: Vacant desert lands, hillside (Open Space) East: Washington Street, Vacant partially improved lands (Community Commercial) 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District -2- ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Biological Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities / Service Systems Agriculture Resources Cultural Resources Hydrology / Water Quality Noise Recreation Air Quality Geology /Soils Land Use / Planning Population / Housing Transportation/Traffic Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the X environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) ave been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DE9LARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon t proposed project, nothing further is required. 1 12, 0 Date -3- EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show -that the impact simply does not apply to projects like. the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. . 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact' to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," maybe cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead -4_ agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance -5- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? (General Plan Exhibit 3.6) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Aerial photograph) c) Substantially degrade the existing X visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial X light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) I. a)-d) Washington Street is designated a Primary Image Corridor in the General Plan. As such, special landscaping and setback requirements will be applied to the project site. The proposed project includes retention areas immediately west of the Washington Street right of way. These retention areas are proposed to be approximately 150 feet in width, and will provide an open space area along Washington Street. The proposed project will include two story homes through the core of the site, with 25 single story lots along the south and west boundaries of the site. The site is immediately east of the foothills of the Santa Rosa mountains, which occur to the west. The two story units will therefore reduce views of the lower foothills for pedestrians and travelers along Washington Street. Due to the height of the Santa Rosas,, however, the mid -range and peaks of the mountains will still be visible. Impacts to scenic vistas are therefore expected to be less than significant. The site is currently partially developed, with the remains of the Arts Foundation project. The developed area consists of terraces for exhibits, parking lots and un-maintained landscaping. A stabilized sand dune is located on the northwest corner of the site. The proposed project will re -grade the site to eliminate the below -grade parking lot, and will remove the sand dune. The site, when developed, will be at elevations 4 to 12 feet higher than the Laguna de la Paz project immediately south. Since the site rises in elevation from east to west, the greater grade differential will occur in the southwestern portion of the site. Within Laguna de la Paz at this location, is open space and perimeter roadway. The closest residential structure is over 100 feet southeasterly. The distance will allow residents within Laguna de la Paz views of the mid -range of the mountains, and the mountain tops, but views of the toe of slope will be blocked. However, the residences in -6- this area of Laguna de la Paz have front yards and garages facing west and north, while the back yards face east and south. Therefore, these residences' primary views will not be impacted by the proposed project. Overall impacts will be less than significant. The primary source of light and glare upon build out of the site will be from automobile headlights and landscaping lighting. The City regulates lighting levels and does not allow lighting to spill over onto adjacent property. Lighting of the hillsides will be prohibited by mitigation measures associated with biological resources, below. Impacts will be less than significant. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would theproject: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique X Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? (General Plan EIR p. III-21 ff.) X b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (General Plan Land Use Map) 1I..a)-c) The project site is located in an urbanized section of the City, and is not located near agricultural land uses. The closest agricultural lands are several miles to the south and east of the site. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the site, and the zoning of the property is Low Density Residential. There will be no impacts to agricultural resources associated with the proposed project. -8- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any air quality standard or X contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, 2002 PM10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) III. a), b) & c) An air quality analysis was completed for the proposed project'. The analysis was based on the assumption that as many as 128 residential units (74 main residences and 74 guest units) would be constructed on the site. The Specific Plan, as currently proposed, allows for three guest houses in addition to the primary residence on each lot. Therefore, it can be estimated that the air quality impacts associated with operation of the proposed project after build out of the project could be twice that described in the air quality analysis. To that end, the operational impacts are characterized on that basis below. Construction impacts The analysis found that during grading of the proposed project, equipment emissions would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance, but without mitigation, fugitive dust emissions would be exceeded. The City requires the preparation of PM10 management plans for all construction projects. These plans implement the 2002 PM10 Plan by requiring the use of best available management measures in the grading of project sites. The plan to be prepared for the proposed project will be required to demonstrate 1 "Air Quality Analysis Canyon Ridge Residential Development" prepared by LSA Associates, December 2006. -9- that impacts associated with PM10 during grading are reduced to less than significant levels. This City requirement will assure that impacts associated with fugitive dust are reduced to less than significant levels. The analysis further found that construction emissions, including VOC emissions resulting from architectural coatings and asphalt paving, would be below thresholds of significance. Lone Term Impacts As previously stated, the analysis conducted for the project assumed that up to 148 units would be constructed on the project site, while the Specific Plan allows up to 296 units. However, even if doubling the resulting emissions during operational activities of the project, impacts, will be below thresholds of significance as established by SCAQMD, as demonstrated in the Table reproduced below from the air quality impact analysis. Table 1 Project Build Out Dail Emissions,148 units Ibs/da Source Dail Emission Rates CO ROC NOX SOX PMIO Stationary Sources: Summer 5.94 10.46 1.88 0.05 1 0.02 Vehicular Traffic: Summer 171.29 13.41 23.8 0.10 18.39 Subtotal Summer 177.23 23.88 25.68 0.16 18.41 Stationary Sources: Winter 1.05 9.76 2.47 0.00 0.05 Vehicular Traffic: Winter 203.96 16.63 28.48 0.11 18.39 Subtotal Winter 205.01 26.39 30.94 0.11 18.44 SCA MD Threshold of Significance 550 75 100 150 150 As demonstrated in the Table, even if 296 units were built within the project, thresholds of significance would not be exceeded, and impacts would be less than significant. III. d) & e) The project will consist of residential units and will not result in objectionable odors, nor will it expose residents to concentrations of pollutants. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either X directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and.Wildlife Service (General Plan MEA, p. 78 ff.) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any X riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? ("Biological Assessment..." James Comett, 2000) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? ("Biological Assessment..." James Comett, 2000) d) Interfere substantially with the X movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (`Biological Assessment..." James Cornett, 2000) e) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ("Biological Assessment..." James Cornett, 2000) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, X Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservationplan? (General Plan -11- MEA, p. 78 ff.) IV. a}f) Biological resource analysis was conducted for the previously approved La Quinta Arts Foundation projece. In addition, a follow up investigation was conducted in February 2005 for the previously approved tract map, which followed the Arts Foundation approval3. These analyses, combined with consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game and the US Fish and Wildlife Service, resulted in a series of mitigation measures in association with the project's adjacency to the Santa Rosa mountains. Since preparation of these mitigation measures, conditions have not changed, portions of the site have been developed for Arts Foundation facilities which have since been abandoned, and the mitigation measures described below still apply. The biological resource analysis, which included on -site surveying of the project site, found that the Palm Springs ground squirrel does occur on site. The Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard, desert tortoise and the flat -tailed horned lizard were not detected. The proposed project will result in the loss of desert habitat. The project site is, however, isolated and already impacted by urban development, including development to the north, south and east, and illegal dumping activities which have occurred on -site. There are no wetlands or riparian areas on the project site. The proposed project occurs within the boundaries of the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan. As such, the project proponent shall be required to contribute the mitigation fee in place at the time that building permits are issued. The western edge of the property occurs within the boundary of critical habitat for the Peninsular Bighorn Sheep. The proposed project does not propose the construction of homes on the hillsides. The construction of facilities for drainage along the western. property line will require excavation along the western property line, at the toe of slope, which has a potential to impact bighorn sheep. The proposed grading plan, however, limits activities to only the property itself, not the open space lands located immediately to the west. The project will be conditioned to require the presence of a grading monitor whenever grading operations occur in this area of the project site, in order to assure that the grading activities do not encroach into the open space lands. In order to -assure that impacts are reduced to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1. No .blasting, ripping or excavation shall be permitted above the toe of slope, as defined in the La Quinta Municipal Code, between January I and June 15 of any year. 2. The Homeowners' Association (HOA) for the proposed project shall monitor the project site any signs that bighorn sheep are entering the site. The HOA shall request a list of indicators used to identify sheep presence from DFG prior to grading of the site. The HOA shall take steps to ensure that any observations of bighorn sheep on or near the project site are reported to DFG and the City immediately. If information suggests that bighorn sheep are entering the project 2 `Biological assessment and Impact analysis of the proposed La Quinta arts Foundation Center," prepared by James W. Cornett, April 1999 and 2000. 3 "Canyon Ridge Biological Survey," prepared by AMEC Earth and Environmental, February 2005. -12- site, the HOA shall construct, at its expense, an 8-foot fence between the development and the hillside. The fence shall not contain gaps of greater than I 1 centimeters (4.3 inches). The Foundation shall notify DFG immediately upon receipt of the information suggesting that bighorn sheep are entering onto the project site, and seek any further guidance DFG ,has to offer regarding the construction of the fence. The fence shall be constructed within three months of the receipt of information suggesting that bighorn sheep are entering onto the project site. If requested to do so by DFG, the HOA shall, at its expense, construct temporary fencing to the specifications of DFG to prevent bighorn sheep from entering the project site pending construction of the fence. Any and all fencing constructed will be subject to the City's Hillside Conservation Overlay District. 3. The project developer shall submit a plan, approved by a biologist, which demonstrates that all pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, and fertilizers used on the site will not be harmful wildlife. 4. All exterior lighting shall be aimed away from the hillside. 5. The project landscaping plan will not expose wildlife to toxic materials. All exotic or toxic plans, such as Oleander and Pnmis, and plants which are known to invade or degrade bighorn sheep habitat, such as tamarisk, fountain grass, shall be strictly prohibited. The landscape plan shall be approved by a certified biologist, which approval shall state that the proposed landscape materials are not known to be harmful to wildlife. Prohibited plant materials shall be included in the CC&Rs and provided to each homeowner adjacent to the hillside. 6. The project proponent and HOA shall design its project so as not to facilitate persons to enter onto the hillsides from the project site. To the extent that any portion of the project site begins to be used by persons to enter into the hillsides, the HOA shall post notices discouraging such use. With: implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to biological resources will be reduced to less than significant levels. -13- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES --Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in'15064.5? ("Archaeological Investigations..." ASM Affiliates, 2000) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to'15064.5? ("Archaeological Investigations..." ASM Affiliates, 2000) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 5.9) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (General Plan MEA p. 123 ff.) V. a)-b) & d) Three cultural resource investigations have been conducted for the project site. The first consisted of a site investigation and report, which recorded a potentially significant site, and recommended further analysis. The second consisted of an on -site excavation of the recorded site. A follow-up investigation was conducted in 2005. The project site includes three previously recorded sites, and one site recorded during the first site survey in 1998. Testing and data recovery had previously been completed on the three recorded sites in 1991. Careful grading and on -site monitoring were recommended in the first study. The second study, completed to report on the testing and data recovery at CA- RIV-6214. This process concluded that the site is not significant beyond the recovery performed for the study. Because there have been previously deeply buried sites found'in this area under sand dunes, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: An archaeological monitor shall be on site during any grubbing, earth moving or excavating activity on the undeveloped portions of the site, especially the dune in the northwest corner. Should a resource be identified by the monitor, he or she shall be empowered to halt or redirect grading activities while the resource is properly identified and studied. The monitor shall file a report with the City of his or her findings, including disposition of any resource identified. The project site is not known to have been used as a cemetery or burial ground. California law requires that any remains uncovered by grading activity be immediately "A Cultural Resources Inventory and Evaluation of the La Quinta Arts Center Project"; and "Archaeological Investigations of CA-RIV-6214...," prepared by ASM Affiliates, December 1998 and April 2000, respectively; "Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Canyon Ridge Project," prepared by CRM Tech, February 2005. -14- reported to law enforcement authorities, which take the responsibility of notifying Native American tribes if the remains are found to be historic. This requirement will assure that there will be no impact to human remains as a result of the proposed project. V. c) The project site is outside the traditional lakebed of ancient Lake Cahuilla. No paleontologic resources are expected on the site. -15- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, X as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (MEA Exhibit 6.2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA X Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? (MEA Exhibit 6.3) iv) Landslides? (MEA Exhibit 6.4) X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? (MEA Exhibit 6.5) d) Be located on expansive soil, as X defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property (MEA Exhibit 6.1) e) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (General Plan Exhibit 8.1) VI. a)-e) The project site lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the event of a major earthquake. The homes to be built on the site will be required to meet the City's and the State's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building Code requirements for seismic zones. The site has been previously developed in its eastern portion, and will require filling. The City Engineer will require the preparation of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of grading plans. This requirement will ensure that the filling of the site will be completed in a manner which results in proper compaction of the site. 16 The proposed project is located adjacent to an area subject to landslides and rockfall. No development is planned, however, on the slopes of the hillsides. The project proponent has included a rockfall barrier along the western property line. Impacts from these hazards are expected to be insignificant. The site does not have expansive soils. The proposed project will be required to connect to the CVWD sanitary sewer system, and septic tanks will not be installed. The site is located in an area of severe blow sand potential. The PM10 Management Plan required by the City to control fugitive dust is designed to mitigate the potential impacts associated with blow sand at the project site to a less than significant level. -17- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: a) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (General Plan MEA, p. 95 ff.) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? ("Phase I Environmental Site Assessment," Anacapa Geoservices, 2006) d) Be located on a site which is included X on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment," Anacapa Geoservices, 2006) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plati land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or X physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ft) -18- h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) VII. a)-h) The construction of the proposed homes will not have an impact on hazards and hazardous materials. The City implements Household Hazardous Waste programs through its trash hauler, which are designed to provide for safe disposal of hazardous substances generated in the home. The site is not listed in state and federal databases for contaminated sites. The site is not located in an area which is subject to wildland fires. Impacts are expected to be negligible. -19- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIU. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would theproject: a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.) b) Substantially deplete groundwater X supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a .level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff. c) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.) d) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.) e) Create or contribute runoff water X which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.) f) Place housing within a 100-year flood X hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (General Plan EIR p. III- 187 ff.) g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard X area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6) VIII. a) & b) Domestic water is supplied to the project site by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The development of the site will result in the need for domestic water for residential use and for landscaping irrigation. The CVWD has prepared a Water Management Plan which indicates that it has sufficient water sources to accommodate growth in its service area. The proposed project was considered in this analysis, insofar as it is consistent with the General Plan designation for the property, and General Plan land use designations were used by CVWD in determining potential demand for domestic water. The CVWD has implemented or is implementing water conservation, purchase and replenishment measures which will result in a surplus of water in the long term. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's water efficient landscaping and construction provisions, including requirements for water efficient fixtures and appliances, which will ensure that the least amount of water is utilized within the homes. The applicant will also be required to comply with the City's NPDES standards, requiring that potential pollutants not be allowed to enter surface waters. These City standards will assure that impacts to water quality and quantity will be less than significant. VIII. c) & d) The proposed project is required to retain the 100 year, 24 hour storm on -site, per City standards. The project site is located immediately east of the slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains. As a result, the project site currently accepts considerable up -slope flows during a storm event, in addition to the storm flows generated on the site itself. When the proposed project is constructed, areas which are currently in natural desert or permeable cover will be covered by impermeable surfaces. This will result in increased storm flows, and increased velocities of such storm flows. In order to assure that the proposed project retains these storm flows, and does not impact down -stream properties, the City Engineer has required the preparation of a hydrology analysis which describes the improvements required to assure the retention of the 100 year storm on site. The hydrology analysis has in turn led to the design of an on -site drainage system which consists of a series of surface drainage ditches along the western property boundary, which convey off -site flows to drainage structures within the proposed project. These drainage structures will convey water through the site through an underground system, which will also include catch basins throughout the site to collect on -site flows. The drainage system will ultimately discharge into the retention basins at several locations. The retention basins have a capacity of 9.01 acre feet, which will contain the 100 year storm, with a freeboard area at the top. The hydrology study demonstrates that the retention basins are adequately sized to retain the 100 year 24 hour storm on site. The City Engineer will continue to review the analysis as final plans are prepared, and must approve the final hydrology study prior to the issuance of permits for development of the -21- site. This requirement will assure that impacts associated with storm flows will be reduced to less than significant levels. VIII. e)-g) The site is not located in a flood zone as designated by FEMA. -22- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact DC. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established X community? (Aerial photo) b) Conflict with any applicable land use X plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan Land Use Element) . c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 74 ff.) IX. a)-c) The project site is designated Low Density Residential in the General Plan. The proposed project is consistent with this designation, and proposes the construction of 74 single family homes, when up to 113 could be allowed. The Zoning Ordinance allows the construction of a guest house on a single family lot. The proposed Specific Plan includes provisions for the construction of up to three guest houses on each lot. The purpose of the Specific Plan is to allow variations in City standards, and creative development. The addition of the guest houses within the project boundary is not expected to significantly alter the character of the single family residential neighborhood created by the proposed project. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. The project site is within the boundary of the mitigation fee for the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan. The project proponent will be required to contribute fees in effect at the time of issuance of permits in compliance with that Plan. -23- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a X known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) b) Result in the loss of availability of a }{ locally -important mineral, resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) X. a) & b) The proposed project site is within the MRZ-1 Zone, and consists primarily of coarse sands. The site is located in a fully urbanized area of the City, on a major roadway, and is not considered suitable for mineral resources. -24- Potentially Less Than ' Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XI. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation X X of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? ("Noise impact Analysis," LSA 2006) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? "Noise Impact Analysis," LSA 2006) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA 2006) d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA 2006) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) XI. a)-f) A noise impact study was completed for the proposed projects. The study found that the noise levels currently on Washington Street exceed the City's standards for sensitive receptors, and are 7 1. 0 dBA CNEL at 50 feet from the centerline. The study further found that the noise level at this location at General Plan build out will be 73.6 dBA CNEL. Since the project is proposing residential structures, the noise levels must be mitigated to "Noise Impact Analysis Canyon Ridge," prepared by LSA, December 2006. -25- an exterior level of 65 dBA CNEL, and the interior noise levels must not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. As currently planned, units closest to Washington Street will be approximately 190 feet from the center line of Washington, and will experience noise levels of 69 dBA CNEL without mitigation. This noise level exceeds the City's standard, and represents a potentially significant impact which requires mitigation, as described below. The study further found that if second floor balconies are proposed on the units closest to Washington Street, they will also experience noise levels in excess of the City's standard, and will also require mitigation to reduce the noise impact to a less than significant level. Finally, the: study found that the interior of residences within 1,076 feet of the center line of Washington will experience noise levels in excess of 57 dBA CNEL with windows open. This is also a potentially significant impact which requires mitigation. Noise will be generated during project construction. Construction equipment, particularly that used during the grading process, can generate noise levels over 85 dBA for short periods. The proposed project is located immediately north of the existing Laguna de la Paz residential development. It is likely that the grading of the site will result in noise levels which exceed the City's standards. Although construction noise is temporary, periodic and short-term, it is a potentially significant impact to the adjacent residents, which requires mitigation. 1. Construction activities shall be limited to those hours prescribed in the Municipal Code. 2. All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly functioning and maintained mufflers. 3. All storage and staging areas, as well as equipment servicing areas, shall be located along the northern property line of the proposed project. No storage or staging shall be permitted adjacent to Laguna de la Paz. 4. A six foot wall shall be constructed along the perimeter of the site on Washington Street. 5. Second floor balconies facing Washington Street shall require a 6 foot high perimeter barrier. This barrier can consist of CMU,. Plexiglas, or a combination of both. 6. Air conditioning and ventilation systems shall be required for all units located within 1,076 feet of the Washington Street center line. With implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts associated with noise at the site are expected to be less than significant. -26- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth X . in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) b) Displace substantial numbers of X existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewheie? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of X people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) M a)-c) The construction of 74 single family homes will not induce substantial population growth, but will instead accommodate normally occurring growth patterns in the area. The site is currently partially developed but vacant, and no one will be displaced. Impacts associated with population and housing are expected to be non-existent. -27- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.) X Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks X Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, X p. 46 ff.) XIII. a) Build out of the site will have a less than significant impact on public services. The proposed project will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City contract. Build out of the proposed project will generate sales and property tax which will offset the costs of added police and fire services, as well as the costs of general government. The project will be required to pay the mandated school fees and park in lieu fees in place at the time of issuance of building permits to reduce the impacts to those services. The proposed project will be required to provide for parks through adherence to the City's Quimby Ordinance, which requires the payment of in lieu fees for future parks acquisitions. _28_ Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of X existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application materials) b) Does the project include recreational X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the enviromrient? (Application materials) XIV. a) & b) The project proponent will be subject to park in lieu fees for the provision of recreation facilities throughout the City. The addition of 150 people to the community will not significantly impact existing recreational facilities. In addition, the proposed project includes a 0.47 acre `recreation lot' which is proposed to be an open green without specific facilities. -29- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XV. TRANSPORTATIONlTRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is X substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan FIR, p. III-29 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or X cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.) c) Result in a change in air traffic X patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (No air traffic involved in project) d) Substantially increase hazards due to a X design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (TTM 5060) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (TTM 35060) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (TTM 35060) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, X or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project description) XV. a)-g) The proposed project is designated Low Density Residential in the General Plan. Under this designation, a total of 113 housing units could be allowed on the site. The Specific Plan proposes the development of 74 single family homes. The site will generate approximately 708 average daily trips, which are well within the trip generation analyzed in the General Plan EIR. That document found that traffic on Washington Street at build out of the General Plan would operate at an acceptable level of service. Since the proposed project will generate fewer units than originally envisioned, the impacts -30- associated with the proposed project are expected to be slightly lower than previously analyzed, and will be less than significant. The proposed project includes a secondary access point at its northeastern corner, which will provide adequate emergency access to the site. The Specific Plan includes a provision for tandem parking within garages for the proposed project, which is a variation from the City's zoning standards. However, the Specific Plan does not propose a reduction in the parking standards overall, so parking will be consistent with the requirements of the zoning ordinance. The project is not located in proximity to an airport or airstrip. The proposed project occurs on Washington Street, which is currently served by SunLine Transit. Residents and their guests will therefore have direct access to public transportation. Overall impacts to traffic are expected to be less than significant. -31- Potentially . Less Than '. Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment X requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) b) Require or result in the "construction of X new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) c) Require or result in the construction of X new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) d) Have sufficient water supplies X available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) e) Result in a determination by the X wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has " adequate capacity to serve the project=s projected demand in addition to the provider=s existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) 0 Be served by a landfill with sufficient X permitted capacity to accommodate the project=s solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) g) Comply with federal, state, and local X statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) -32- XVI. a)-g) Utilities are available at the project site. The service providers for water, sewer, electricity and other utilities have facilities in the immediate vicinity of the site, and will collect connection and usage fees to offset for the cost of providing services. The City's solid waste franchisee will transport waste generated by the project to thhe Edom Hill transfer station, where it will be consolidated and transported to one of several landfills in the region. All these landfills have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project. The construction of the proposed project is expected to have less than significant impacts on utility providers. -33- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to X degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to X achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? b) Does the project have impacts that are X individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively .considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental X effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVII. a) The site has the potential to impact biological resources. These impacts have been mitigated above to a less than significant level through the mitigation measures included in this document. Similarly, impacts associated with cultural resources can be mitigated to less than significant levels, as enumerated above. XVII. b) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation, and is therefore consistent with the goals of the General Plan for the property. The proposed project will add to the housing types offered to the City's residents, also a goal of the General Plan. XVII. c) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan vision for this area. As previously stated, the traffic generated by the proposed project will be less than that -34- anticipated in the General Plan EIR. Similarly, the reduction in potential units on the site will reduce impacts associated with air quality, noise, and other environmental issues impacting the community. Construction of the project will have no significant cumulative impacts. XVII. d) The proposed project has the potential to adversely affect human beings, due to noise impacts. These impacts have been mitigated in this document to less than significant levels. -35- XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Environmental Assessment 2004-522 was used in the preparation of this report. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Not applicable. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. Not applicable. -36- 00 V d 0 0 0 U N 3 C) z o Itt N z P. O„av wvy °a daw d t� M 00 00 ccq F O Fqu 00 o o 0 C a� o g x cq �A O X 'ro M N i--� oz o z� a w F a i w d A a a� �WUW OU d � o c a z ti c o c � c O cU�G U � caa .�0. F iC h N ttl o � w N U O O z qy z z a ci ¢ � N A �,, N A �Qx � x UA0.71 � z w cti O O 0 ~ m O � V I IF.I O O C, a' r' 0 it .2 O O cl N th,0, .2 to a a O w w G _� cgi .� V -0> G d F b F A a a� U OV p Hwy RI U N G F � A a w C7 a� C1 �OCL zz „ ap A a O rr V1 iG F U h \ o . \� 2 \ 2 {m u k & \ / e j 0 E )_ \ \ \ � § ± § (42 )2 ) j ! kk /. ) }) \0 \ } k \ ' )? ) \) )\ )) ) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-081 CASE: SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-081 APPLICANT: LAING LUXURY HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 23rtl day, of January, 2007 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Laing Luxury Homes, for approval of a Specific Plan to establish development standards, principles, guidelines and programs for the development of 74 homes on lands totaling 28.33 acres and located at the northwest corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48 (extended), more particularly described as: ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 760-240-014 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment on the proposed project. All written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and . WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published a public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on January 13, 2007, as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and WHEREAS, said Specific Plan has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2006-579 in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. The Community Development Director has determined that, as conditioned, the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, is recommending that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified. A Notice.of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; and WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings to justify a recommendation to the City Council for approval of said Specific Plan: Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Specific Plan 2006-081 Laing Luxury Homes Adopted: Finding A - Consistency with General Plan The property is designated Low Density Residential. The proposed project will be developed with residential uses, which are consistent with the land uses envisioned in the General Plan. Finding B — Public Welfare Enhancement The project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare in that the project is designed in compliance with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, as well as other County and State standards, such as CEQA. Findings C and D — Land Use Compatibility and Property Suitability The residential project is within a residentially designated and zoned area. The project provides adequate buffering through landscaping and walls to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. Additionally, the project will provide adequate perimeter landscaping and acceptable architectural design guidelines. . 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 said Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That it does hereby acknowledge that Environmental Assessment 2006- 579 has determined that no significant effects on the environment have been identified and mitigation measures are being imposed if needed; and 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2006-081, 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 23rd day of January, 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: P:\reports-pc\1-23-07\ SP06-081 PC RESO.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Specific Plan 2006-081 Laing Luxury Homes Adopted: ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R. EVANS Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\reports-pc\i-23-07\ SP06-081 PC RESO.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-081 LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City") , its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding' to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Specific Plan, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. . The City 'shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, . action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. All mitigation measures contained in Environmental Assessment 2006-579 shall be met. 3. Within 30 days of City Council approval, applicant shall provide five copies of the Final Specific Plan document to the Community Development Department, The Final Specific Plan shall include all project related final Conditions of Approval and correct any typographical errors, internal document inconsistencies, and/or minor amendments deemed necessary by City staff. In addition the following amendments shall be made: a. The Specific Plan shall be amended to correct references to "op en space lots K & L," and any other discrepancies in lot numbers, consistent with the labeling shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map. b. The Specific Plan shall be amended to change the definition of the "Guest Suites" as provided in Exhibit A. In addition, the Specific Plan shall be amended to allow up to a maximum of one guest suite with kitchenette per lot. c. The Specific Plan shall be amended to require the location of a recreational amenity in the central park site. The recreational amenity could include, but is not limited to, a pool or spa, tot lot, bocci ball court, putting greens, picnic area, and/or community garden. The recreational amenity shall be maintained by the homeowner's association. In addition, seating shall be established along all trails at intervals not greater than 200 feet. Recreational amenities shall be maintained by the homeowner's asso ciation. d. The "Wall Concepts" Exhibit shall be amended to eliminate the graphic representing a 6'9" wall, and replace it with a 6'0" wall. e. The Specific Plan shall be amended to allow for the Hacienda- units to have a minimum front yard building setback of 15 feet except for P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\PC COA SP 2006-081.doc _ wmnaam PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-081 LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 garages, which shall have a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet. Garages oriented parallel to the fronting street shall have a minimum front yard setback of 15 feet. 4. The use of the subject property for single family residential uses shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits and conditions of approval contained in Tentative Tract Map 35060, Specific Plan 2006-081, Site Development Permit 2006-873 and Environmental Assessment 2006-579, unless otherwise amended by the Conditions of Approval. 5. No signage is permitted with this approval. Signage shall be reviewed under separate permit. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 28.33 ACRES INTO 74 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 LAING LUXURY HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 23`d day of January, 2007, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Laing Luxury Homes_ for the subdivision of 28.33 acres site into 74 single-family lots and other miscellaneous lots, located at the northwest corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48 (extended), more particularly described as: ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 760-240-014 WHEREAS, The La Quinta Community Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 2006-579 in accordance with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63)• in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2006-579 for this Tentative Tract Map in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. The Community Development Director has determined that, as conditioned, the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, is recommending that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes.; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said City Council did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify approval of said Tentative Tract Map 35060: A. The Tentative Tract Map and its improvement and design, are consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan 2006-081, as amended, in that its street design and lots are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and will provide adequate infrastructure and public utilities. B. The design of the subdivision and its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat because the site does not contain significant biological resources. Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Tentative Tract Map 35060 Laing Luxury Homes Adopted: C. The design of the subdivision and subsequent improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because the construction of 74 residential units will not have considerable cumulative impacts. The project is consistent with the General Plan, and the potential impacts associated with General Plan buildout. D. The design of, the subdivision and the proposed types of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently exist and access is provided within the project and to adjacent public streets. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 35060for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this the 23rd day of January, 2007 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R. EVANS Community Development Director PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 GENERAL 1 . The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Tentative Tract Map, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. This Tentative Tract Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code § § 66410 through 66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC"). The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.la-guinta.orq. 3. This tentative tract map shall expire two years after City Council approval, unless recorded or granted a time extension pursuant to the requirements of La Quinta Municipal Code 9.200.080 (Permit expiration and time extensions). 4. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Improvement Permit) Community Development Department Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department Desert Sands Unified School District Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) e Imperial Irrigation District (IID) California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency e SCAQMD Coachella Valley Page 1 of 24 PdReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. A project -specific NPDES construction permit must be obtained by the applicant; and who then shall' submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's ( RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NOI"), prior to the issuance of a grading or site construction permit by the City. 5. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permittee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabrnphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this project. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control 4) Tracking Control 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. Page 2 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant to this project. F. The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. 6. Permits issued 'under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). 7. Approval of this Tentative Tract Map shall not be construed as approval for any horizontal dimensions implied by any site plans or exhibits unless specifically identified in the following conditions of approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS 8. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access, easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. Said conferred rights shall also include grant of access easement to the City of La Quinta for the purpose of graffiti removal by City staff or assigned agent in perpetuity and agreement to the method to remove graffiti and to paint over to best match existing. The applicant shall establish the aforementioned requirements in the CC&R's for the development or other agreements as approved by the City Engineer. 9. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street rights -of -way in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 10. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Washington Street (Augmented Major Arterial, 132' ROW) — The standard 66 feet from the centerline of Washington Street for a total 132-foot ultimate developed right of way except an additional variable right of way dedication for a deceleration/right turn only lane at the proposed Primary Entry intersection measured 74 feet west of the centerline of Washington Street and length per Engineering Bulletin # 06-13. The required right of way shall be for a length of 248 feet plus a Page 3 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 storage length and a transition taper dedication of an additional 150 feet to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 11. The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map all private street rights -of - way in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 12. The private street rights -of -way to be retained for private use required for this development include: A. PRIVATE STREETS 11 In accordance with the City of La Quinta Municipal Code, except at the primary and secondary entry, residential streets shall have 36-foot travel width measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line. The travel width may be reduced to 32 feet with parking restricted to one side, and 28 feet if on -street parking is prohibited, and provided there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant establishes provisions for ongoing enforcement of the parking restriction in the CC&R's. The CC&R's shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department prior to recordation. 2) The reduced street widths proposed at the pedestrian paseos along the north -south streets and at intersections shall be approved by the City Engineer. The applicant is required to demonstrate that the proposed street width reductions with proposed parking provides for safe passage of vehicles particularly at T-intersections and as approved by the City Engineer. B. CUL DE SACS 1) The cul de sac shall conform to the shape shown on the tentative map with a 38-foot curb radius at the bulb or larger as shown on the tentative map. C. KNUCKLE 1) The knuckle shall conform to the shape shown on the tentative tract map except for minor revision as may be required by the City Engineer. Curve radii for curbs at all street intersections shall not be less than 25 feet and similar to the lay out shown on the rough grading plan. 13. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction Page 4 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED' TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 plans. Pursuant to this requirement, the Applicant shall include in the submittal packet containing the draft final map submitted for map checking, an offsite street geometric layout, drawn at 1 " equals 40 feet, detailing the following design aspects: median curb line, outside curb line, lane line alignment including lane widths, left turn lanes, deceleration lane(s) and bus stop turnout(s). The geometric layout shall be accompanied with sufficient professional engineering studies to confirm the appropriate length of all proposed turn pockets and auxiliary lanes that may impact the right of way dedication required of the project and the associated landscape setback requirement 14. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street rights - of -way shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map are necessary prior to approval of the Final Map dedicating such rights -of -way, the applicant shall grant the necessary rights -of -way within 60 days of a written request by the City. 15. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public utility easement contiguous with, and along both sides of all private streets. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. 16. The applicant shall create, at a minimum, perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public rights -of -way as follows: A. Washington Street (Augmented Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 17. At locations where the onsite finished grade adjacent to the landscaped setback lot has an elevation differential with respect to the arterial street top of curb exceeding 11 feet, the applicant shall comply with, and accommodate, the maximum slope gradients in the parkway/setback area and meandering sidewalk requirements by either: 1) increasing the landscape setback size as needed, or 2) installing retaining walls between the sidewalk and the back of the landscaped area as needed. 18. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement Page 5 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas on the Final Map. 19. Direct vehicular access to Washington Street from lots with frontage along Washington Street is restricted, except for those access points identified on the tentative tract map, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map. 20. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. In particular, the applicant shall obtain any temporary construction easement and permanent access easements for improvements at the proposed access drive on Washington Street across Lake La Quinta Drive and proposed drainage improvements from Saint Francis of Assisi Catholic Church to the north. 21. In the event that the applicant is unable to secure an access easement with Saint Francis of Assisi Catholic Church, Tentative Tract Map 35060 shall be redesigned to provide for an emergency access along the north property line connection Street " C" with Washington Street. 22. Prior to recording Tract, applicant shall acquire access route across property located within the subject tract. The access route shall conform to the geometric lay -out shown on Tentative Tract Map No. 35060. 23. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 24. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 25. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations that will convey water without ponding, and provide lateral containment of dust and residue during street sweeping operations. If a wedge or rolled curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be near vertical with a 1 /8" batter and a minimum height of 0.1'. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to standard curb height prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. Page 6 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\La1ng\C0A - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 , 26. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Washington Street (Augmented Major Arterial; 132' R/W):, No additional widening is required on the west side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Tentative Map boundary,, except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate:, . a) A deceleration/right turn only lane at Washington Street Primary Entry. The west curb face shall be located fifty six feet (56') west of the centerline and length to be determined by a traffic study prepared for the applicant by a licensed traffic engineer per Engineering Bulletin # 06-13. As a minimum, the required deceleration lane shall be for a length of 248 feet plus calculated storage length and a transition taper of an additional 150 feet to accommodate improvements. Other required improvements in the Washington Street right-of-way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: b) Remove Existing Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit and approved by the Community Development and Public Works Department) — The applicant may be required to reconstruct the curb and gutter and remove the bus turnout pavement at the existing bus stop turn out north of Avenue 47 if SunLine Transit determines that the bus stop is not required and the City concurs with that decision. The curb face shall be 48 feet from the center line of Washington Street to match the existing curb face. c) Reconstruct the curb and gutter at the northerly entry after the signal is operational at the proposed shared access drive on Washington Street and Lake La Quinta Drive intersection. Said reconstruction shall include removal of curb, gutter, pavement and all other improvements. d1. All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. e) 12-foot wide meandering sidewalk/Class I Golf Cart Path. The meandering sidewalk/Class I Golf Cart Path shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that either touches the back Page 7 of 24 NReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 of curb or approaches within five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk/Class I Golf Cart Path curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. f) Reconstruction of the existing 18 - foot wide raised landscaped median along the entire boundary of the Tentative Tract Map plus variable width as needed to accommodate a left turn deceleration lane for the northbound traffic and ancillary median improvements to provide for full movements concurrent with the proposed signalized intersection at Lake La Quinta Drive and Washington Street. g) Establish a benchmark in the Washington Street right of way and file a record of the benchmark with the County of Riverside. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). 2) The applicant shall install the traffic signal at the proposed shared access drive/Lake La Quinta Drive and Washington Street intersection. The applicant is responsible for 25% of the cost to design and install the traffic signal and is subject to reimbursement of the remaining 50% from available funds from the Development Impact Fee Program and 25% obligation of Saint Francis of Assisi Church to the north for the cost to design and construct the traffic signal. If Saint Francis of Assisi Church does not have an approved project connecting to the subject intersection, the applicant shall pay 50% of the cost to design and install the signalization for the resulting intersection. The applicant shall enter into a DIF Reimbursement Agreement with the City of La Quinta concurrent with the Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the Final Map for the amount specified in the DIF Program in effect at the time the traffic signal is accepted by the City Council. Associated with the traffic signal installation, the applicant shall install all necessary traffic signal equipment and appurtenances to interconnect the proposed signal with the existing traffic signals at the Washington Street/Avenue 48 and Washington Street/Avenue 47 intersections. The traffic signal shall be.designed for an eight phase operation as split phasing is undesirable. Page 8 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 The total cost shall be limited to the following soft cost percentages: a) Administration — 5 % b) Engineering/Design — 10 % c) Construction Engineering — 7.75 % The applicant is responsible for construction of all improvements mentioned above. The development is eligible for reimbursement from the City's Development Impact Fee (DIF) fund in accordance with policies established for that program and per the above limitations. The cost of improvements expended by the applicant as identified in the DIF Study is eligible for reimbursement up to the amount shown in the DIF Program at the.time the signal is accepted by the City Council for the traffic signal at the Washington Street and Lake La Quinta Drive/proposed shared access drive intersection. The applicant is responsible for the remaining cost of the improvements listed above. B. PRIVATE,STREETS (ON -SITE) 11 Construct 36-foot wide travel width as shown on the tentative map measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line where the residential streets are single loaded. . 2) Construct 32-foot wide travel width as shown on the tentative map measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line, provided parking is restricted to one side and there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual enforcement of the restrictions. 3) Construct a 28-foot wide travel width as shown on the tentative map measured from gutter flow line to gutter flow line, provided parking is restricted and there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors, and the applicant makes provisions for perpetual enforcement of the restrictions. The reduced street widths proposed at the pedestrian paseos along the north -south streets and at intersections shall be approved by the City Engineer. The applicant is required to demonstrate that the proposed street width reductions with proposed parking provides for safe passage of vehicles particularly at T- intersections and as approved by the City Engineer. 4) The location of driveways of corner lots shall not be located within the curb return and away from the intersection when possible. C. PRIVATE STREETS (OFF -SITE) Page 9 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 1) Construct the shared access drive at the west leg of the Washington Street and Lake La Quinta Drive intersection to be a 68-foot wide travel width as shown on the rough grading plan and as conditioned herewith. The applicant's design professional shall redesign the proposed street improvements to accommodate dual left turn lanes, one through lane and one right turn lane, and to align with the existing configuration of Lake La Quinta Drive on the east side of Washington Street in an effort to provide for an eight phase signalized intersection as approved by the City Engineer. 2) Construct the Secondary Entry connection from the development to the proposed shared access drive mentioned above. The design shall be for ingress and egress for residents and emergency vehicle access as approved by the City Engineer. D. PRIVATE CUL DE SACS 1) Shall be constructed according to the lay -out shown on the tentative map with 38-foot curb radius or greater at the bulb similar to the layout shown on the rough grading plan. E. KNUCKLE 1) Construct the knuckle to conform to the lay -out shown in the tentative tract map, except for minor revisions as may be required by the City Engineer. 27. All gated entries shall provide for a three -car minimum stacking capacity for inbound traffic to be a minimum length of 62 feet from the 24-hour manned guard to the street; and shall provide for a full turn -around outlet for non -accepted vehicles. Where a gated entry is proposed, the applicant shall submit a detailed exhibit at a scale of 1 " = 10', demonstrating that those passenger vehicles that do not gain entry into the development can safely make a full turn -around (minimum radius to be 24 feet) out onto the main street from the gated entry. Pursuant to said condition, there shall be a minimum of twenty feet width provided at the turn -around opening provided. The entry and exit shall be a minimum of 20 feet of total paved roadway surface or as approved by the Fire Department. The 24-hour manned Primary Entry Gate design shall be designed for 45-foot truck turning radius and maneuvering to provide access for large moving vans to gain access to the development as rejection of said vehicles may result in trucks backing out of the Primary Entry on to Washington Street as approved by the City Engineer and the Riverside County Fire Department. Page 10 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. 28. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Residential Shared Access Drive Major Arterial 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. 4.0" a.c /5.0" c.a.b. 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 29. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 30. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry (Washington Street): Right turn movements in and out are permitted. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. B. Secondary Entry (Proposed Shared Access Drive): Ingress and Egress shall be provided for Residents and Emergency Vehicles. - C. Proposed Shared Access Drive (Washington Street across Lake La Quinta Drive): Right turn movements in and out are permitted. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited, until signalized. Both Primary Entry and Proposed Entry shall be operational during construction phases. 31. Improvements'shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 32. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted Page 11 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. FINAL MAPS 33. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a file that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept a raster - image file of such Final Map. The Final Map shall be of a .1 " = 40' scale. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 34. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 35. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. On -Site Rough Grading Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal B. PM10 Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal C. SWPPP 1" = 40' Horizontal NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently. D. Off -Site Street Improvement/Storm Drain Plan Page 12 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical E. Interim Off -Site Street Improvement Plans 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical F. Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan 1 " 40' Horizontal The Off -Site street improvement plans shall have separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area. G. On -Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical H. Traffic Signal Plan 1 " = 20' Horizontal NOTE: D through H to be submitted concurrently. The following plans shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department for review and approval. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the Building and Safety Director in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may .be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. On -Site Residential Precise Grading Plan 11 " = 30' Horizontal Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans and/or as approved by the Engineering Department. "Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. Page 13 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the building floor plan identifying every building egress and which notes the most current California Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking. In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a "Site Development" plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer. 36. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the Online Engineering Library at the City website (www.la-guinta.orq). Navigate to the Public Works Department home page and,look for the Standard Drawings hyperlink. 37. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. 38. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 39. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off -site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement (" SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 40. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 41. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall, include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed Page 14 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 , improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. When improvements are phased through a "Phasing Plan," or an administrative approval (e.g., Site Development Permits), all off -site improvements and common on - site improvements (e.g., backbone utilities, retention basins, perimeter walls, landscaping and gates) shall be constructed, or secured through a SIA, prior to the issuance of any permits in the first phase of the development, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each subsequent phase shall either be completed, or secured through a SIA, prior to the completion of homes or the occupancy of permanent buildings within such latter phase, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. In the event the applicant fails to construct the improvements for the development, or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, pursuant to the approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of all permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. 42. Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Tract Map, and the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to: A. Construct certain off -site improvements. B. Construct additional off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement of its costs by others. C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are considered to be an obligation of this tentative tract map. D. Secure the costs for future improvements that are.to be made by others. E. To agree to any combination of these means, as the City may require. Off -Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The applicant shall complete Off -Site Improvements including the traffic signal at the Washington Street and Lake La Quinta Drive/proposed shared access drive intersection in the first phase of construction or by the issuance of the 20 % Building Permit or 20th Building Permit. In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of the Final Map, or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the costs of such improvements. Page 15 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 43. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off -site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer.. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be approved by the City Engineer. At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall also submit one copy each of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " reduction of each page of the Final Map, along with a copy of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " Vicinity Map. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost estimates. Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements. GRADING 44. The applicant.shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 45. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer,_, • , _ , 46. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive, Dust Control), LQMC, and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. Page 16 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doe PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. 47. As the area to the west has an open space covenant attached to any land action, the applicant shall be required to have an independent grading monitor/inspector on site during its grading operation to verify non disturbance of any "Open Space". The "Open Space" area shall be identified through physical means and verification of the grading monitor/inspector prior to approval of the grading permit issuance. All grading activity shall be conducted on site and shall not impact the open space property to the west. 48. Associated with the "Open Space" covenant for land to the west, this unique site requires retaining wall construction along the westerly property line. The wall heights and design shall be approved by the Community Development Department approval along with the any other approvals required by the City for construction and design of the retaining wall. Erosion Control and Drainage Systems necessary to restrict off site flow and control erosion will be subject to City Engineer approval. Consistent with the existing "Open Space" covenant, encroachment on to the adjacent land to the west, including temporary construction access, is prohibited. 49. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 50. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six feet (6') of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 51. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. Page 17 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 52. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot higher from the building pads in adjacent developments. 53. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 54. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 55. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 56. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Retention Basin Design Criteria, Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. More specifically, stormwater falling on the site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24.hour event producing the .. greatest total run off. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets and shall also accept upstream tributary flows for this regional sag location on Washington Street. Stormwater handling for Washington Street may require additional drainage facilities to be constructed. 57. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 58. In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate will be considered to be zero. Page 18 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 59. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 60. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 61. The applicant shall relocate the maintenance access ramp for the southerly retention basin with access off of Washington Street (Lot 1) to Street "E" within the development, The maintenance access ramp design shall be as approved by the City Engineer. 62. For on -site above ground common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems. Side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. Additionally, retention basin widths shall be not less than 20 feet at the bottom of the basin unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 63. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B) (7), LQMC unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 64. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 65. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 66. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. Pursuant to the aforementioned, the applicant shall construct off -site drainage improvements and gain construction UTILITIES 67. The applicant'shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities), LQMC. 68. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all Page 19 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 69. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 70. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the. City Engineer. CONSTRUCTION 71. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION 72. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 73. The applicant shall provide and maintain landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 74. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 75. Final landscaping and irrigation plans (and precise grading plans relevant to landscape areas) shall be prepared by a licensed landscape professional and shall be reviewed by the ALRC and approved by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of the first building permit. Said plans shall include all landscaping associated with this project, including perimeter landscaping, and be in compliance with Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscaping) of the Municipal Code. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County Page 20 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 Agriculture Commissioner prior to submittal of the final plans to the Community Development Department. 76. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. 77. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance requirements per guidelines in the AASHTO "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 51" Edition or latest, in the design and/or installation of all landscaping and appurtenances abutting and within the private and public street right-of-way. PUBLIC SERVICES 78. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 79. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 80. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 81. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 82. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As - Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. MAINTENANCE 83. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), Page 21 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 — LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 LQMC. 84. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 85. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 86. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). 87. The developer shall pay school mitigation fees based on their requirements. Fees shall be paid prior to building permit issuance by the City. 88. Tentative Tract 35060 shall provide for parks through payment of an in -lieu fee, as specified in Chapter 13.48, LQMC. The in -lieu fee shall be based on the fair market value of the land within the subdivision. Land value information shall be provided to the Community Development Director, via land sale information, a current fair market value of land appraisal, or other information on land value within the subdivision. The Community Development Director may consider any subdivider -provided or other land value information source for use in calculation of the parkland fee. FIRE MARSHALL 89. For residential areas, approved standard fire hydrants, located at each intersection and spaced 330 feet apart with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI. Fire hydrants are also required every 660 feet on the outside of the perimeter walls. 90. Blue dot retro-reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 91. Any turn or turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot outside turning radius. 92. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of the first floor as measured by outside path of travel. Page 22 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc ' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 - LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 93. The minimum dimension for access roads and gates is 18 feet clear and unobstructed width and a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height, and a turn through the center divider not to exceed every 100 feet.. 94. Any gate providing access from a public roadway to a private entry roadway shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 38-foot turning radius shall be used. 95. Gates shall be automatic, minimum 18 feet in width and shall be equipped with a rapid entry system (KNOX). Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. Automatic gate pins shall be rated with a shear pin force, not to exceed 30 pounds. Gates activated by the rapid entry system shall remain open until closed by the rapid entry system. 96. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. Two sets of water plans are to be submitted to the Fire Department for approval. 97. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with, appropriate lane painting and/or signs. MISCELLANEOUS 98. All applicable conditions/provisions of Specific Plan 2006-081 shall be in force and effect for TTM 35060. 99. The Tentative Tract Map shall be amended to include access easements between lots 47 through 52, 35 through 40, 29 through 34, 69 to 72, 65 to 68, and 58 to 61, to accommodate the pedestrian "paseos" described in the Specific Plans. The paseo easement shall be a minimum of 11 feet in width, and shall be maintained by the homeowner's association. 100. All perimeter wall designs including height, color, material, design shall be reviewed by the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee and the Planning Commission. 101. Proposed street names, with a minimum of two alternative names per street, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval. The street names shall be approved prior to recordation of the final map. 102. All mitigation measures contained in Environmental Assessment 2006-579 shall be met. Page 23 of 24 P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\C0A - TT 35060.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 35060 - LAING LUXURY HOMES JANUARY 23, 2007 103. Prior to final map approval, the developer shall submit to the Community Development Department for review, a copy of the proposed Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the project. If Community Development Director determines City Attorney review is necessary, a deposit will be required for reimbursement of City Attorney review fees. 104. Minor lot configuration modifications required to comply with these conditions and Fire Marshal requirements shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department and Public Works Department. 105. Approval of production home designs and landscaping requires approval of a Site Development permit application by the Planning Commission. 106. The Community Development Director shall cause to be filed with the County Clerk a "Notice of Determination" pursuant to CEQA Guideline § 15075(a) once reviewed and approved by the City Council. The appropriate filing fee shall be paid by the developer within 24 hours of City Council approval of the tentative tract map. 107. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking purposes. 108. A permit from the Community Development Department is required for any temporary or permanent tract signs. Uplighted tract identification signs are allowed subject to the provisions of Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Ordinance. 109. The Community Development and Public Works Directors may allow minor design changes to final map applications that include a reduction in the number of buildable lots, changes in lot sizes, relocation of common open space areas or other required public facilities (e.g., CVWD well sites, etc.) and changes in the alignment of street sections, provided the applicant submits a Substantial Compliance Application to the Public Works Department during plan check disclosing the requested changes and how the changes occurred. These changes shall be conveyed to the City Council when the map is presented for recordation consideration. 110. Each lot shall be limited to not more than one (1) guest suite with kitchenette. Page 24 of 24 PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\COA - TT 35060.doc - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006- 873, ALLOWING DEVELOPMENT OF 74 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON 28.33 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND AVENUE 48 (EXTENDED) CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-873 APPLICANT: LAING LUXURY HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 23RD day of January, 2007, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for Laing Luxury Homes for review of a Site Development Permit to allow the construction of 74 single family homes on 28.33 acres located at the northwest corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48 (extended), more particularly described as: ASSESSOR'S PARC EL NUMBER 760-240-014 WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for the City of La Quinta did, on the 17th day of January, 2007 recommend approval of the proposed project, subject to conditions of approval; WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Site Development Permit: 1. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the General Plan goals, policies and programs relating to the Low Density Residential land use designation, and with Specific Plan 2006-081, and supports the development of a variety of housing types within a Specific Plan. 2. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the standards of the Zoning Ordinance and with Specific Plan 2006-081, as conditioned, which establishes development standards for the project. 3. The proposed Site Development Permit will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Site. Development Permit 2006-873 Laing Luxury Homes Adopted: compatible with surrounding development, and conform with the City's standar ds and requirements, as conditioned. 4. The proposed Site Development Permit, as conditioned, complies with the architectural design standards for Specific Plan 2006-081, and implements the standards and guidelines included in that document. 5. The proposed Site Development Permit, as conditioned, is consistent with the landscaping standards in Specific Plan 2006-081 and implements the standards for landscaping and aesthetics established in the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2006-873, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; and 3. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that the Environmental Assessment (EA 2006-579) assessed the environmental concerns of this Site Development Permit. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 23rd day of January, 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Planning Commission Resolution 2007- Site Development Permit 2006-873 Laing Luxury Homes Adopted: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R. EVANS Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-873 LAING LUXURY HOMES DATE: JANUARY 23, 2007 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this development application or any application thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the developer of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. This Site Development Permit is valid for two years, unless an extension is applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 9.200.080 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 3. This approval is for the following model plans: Bungalow Plan 1 A, 1 B, 1 AX, 1 BX Bungalow Plan 2A, 2B, 2AX, 2BX Bungalow Plan 3A, 3B Bungalow Plan 4A, 4B Hacienda Plan 1 A, 1 B Hacienda Plan 2A, 213 Hacienda Plan 3A, 3B 4. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this approval, final working drawings shall be approved by the Community Development Director. 5. SDP 2006-081 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation measures for the following approvals: ■ Environmental Assessment 2006-579 ■ Specific Plan 2006-081 ■ Tentative Tract Map 35060 In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine precedence. No development permits will be issued until compliance with these conditions has been achieved. PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\PC COA SDP 2006-873.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-873 LAING LUXURY HOMES DATE: JANUARY 23, 2007 6. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies, if required: • Fire Marshal . • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permits) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall ;furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvement plans for City approval. 7. Air conditioning compressors by Zoning Code requirements cannot be placed in sideyards unless a minimum 5 foot clearance between compressor and side property line is provided. 8. A Community Development Department application for Final Landscape Plan Check shall be submitted for final landscaping plans and reviewed by the ALRC per the Code and application requirements with final approval by the Community Development Director. 9. The six foot tall perimeter wall proposed along north and south property lines shall be measured from the interior finished grade of the residential lots. Said walls shall be constructed of solid materials that prevent direct views of adjacent properties. 10. The applicant shall redesign the perimeter wall and berms along the Washington. Street frontage for a maximum combined height of wall and berms not to exceed eight feet, of which the wall height shall not exceed six feet. Said wall shall have staggered openings every "100 feet and pilasters shall be placed at each end as well as the center of the 100 foot sections. P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\PC COA SDP 2006-873.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-873 LAING LUXURY HOMES DATE: JANUARY 23,2007 11. The applicant shall redesign the three tiered retaining walls. Said retaining walls shall have a curvilinear pattern with additional stepping and design details that integrate the walls with natural elements such as rock outcroppings. Additional trees and large shrubs shall be incorporated into the design to soften the visual impact of the proposed walls..A minimum of six feet between said walls and a maximum slope of 3:1 shall exist in locations where trees and/or large shrubs are proposed. 12. The Site Development Permit shall be amended to include one recreational amenity at the central park site. The recreational amenity could include, but is not limited to, a pool or spa, tot lot, bocci ball court, putting greens, picnic area, and/or community garden. In addition, seating shall be established along all trails at intervals not greater than 200 feet. Recreational amenities shall be maintained by the homeowner's association. 13. All "choker" or "chicane" curbs shall be painted red and posted "No Parking" in a manner acceptable to the Public Works Department and the Fire Department. 14. No signage .is permitted with this approval. Signage shall be reviewed under separate permit. 16. As per American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) sight triangle design standards, plants located within sight triangles shall not consist of a height greater than 30 inches from the pavement surface and tree canopies shall not hang below 80 inches. 17. Any ground -mounted mechanical equipment located in view from any street or common area shall be screened by dense landscaping, of a sufficient height to fully screen such equipment above its horizontal plane. 18. Where garages and courtyard walls meet, the wall shall be set back a minimum 6" from the face of the garage to minimize joint cracking. 19. Each lot shall be limited to not more than one (1) " kitchenette" guest suite. 20. The Hacienda units shall have a minimum front yard building setback of 15 feet except for garages, which shall have a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet. Garages oriented parallel to the fronting street shall have a minimum front yard setback of 15 feet. PAReports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Laing\PC COA SDP 2006-873.doc Nis ., �, u a IN �i u I.. : .......... 0 16M a N I d a r t atei l '-* .: is r i rth. i g T D n 7 Xm oD�0 agQ A NORM I M> gaD� I IoQ 'U z r—P 4.1A 8 g real o"'Ir, ol �8� � rR ::2: ED22:111000OOB a6aaaaaaaB��aa6fifi6aaaaBBO' Ia3000000a003��00�9�03360 IDG0906G90G�900�G0���0�90 IGCCCCGCCGCOGOGGOGGO�D�DOB laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaao 006000�0��0�0060G00�00 190�GG@909G0@9�9�009��G�0 1711 l00000000000cooc000000000e laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaao 330000aoaooaooa000ao3aoo IoO0000000000Aooacaa0o0oo 1711 -A 0 �e;ee .e 1+11�II� 1''i{��iiii'�,jl!? 111111 Igf :n3� jilt by f b by b b i; . n eer rrr rre it ne err nee n n n �V. n,rx th� `r �� 11 yr i nr V •* o y\ V r r 4 � c�// ��`�Z � 11 � • yiy ���q�q{p{p � � A i _ / 'V� CA 4 ' r E • r r� I I 1 r 2 t kf Znr I N Yir Y 0 rl y � �� ��l i� `'!'� .�� `4i•: 1 �� 1 � �! t y� i ftr 3ryiS�'yii7 1 x i n1I r� «u (DI] '� : : �s S l: �i�e i :• : t tr 3� � i V!� �~ SIFT v _ Vw ^^aa y� y� E M �.... _� ._WA%W ti E ��IB161111� Fi, p4: a a, on oil Jim up lath as e a tlIl i 1101111 all i I as �=a �a�aaaaaaaaa �100- I li I 'Alk. OEM,, r`� m t rg •60Y 006 r r ■I I ■if ■i I ■s I ■if I� s.�al�•�iL;.: li�.ntl."i� .-"nLi.�:ill.-'�1,�.�' i ��1�7fsnn ■,� )Ilia 1 ■r P lw /a�7I�[1 � p I,�aiu ■r Il ,l7P1� i S" P�02, �yf M M �f NJ I � m II �-- 1 h w II rM, m .19 7 M " JI_ V In . JI F=Ull—. m PH #B STAFF REPORT PLANNING _COMMISSION DATE: JANUARY 23, 2007 CASE NO.: STREET VACATION 2006-043 APPLICANT: NISPERO PROPERTIES, INC. REQUEST: REPORT OF FINDING UNDER CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65402 THAT THE PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT WITHIN DESERT CLUB TRACT, UNIT 4 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN LOCATION: MAIN STREET NORTH OF AVENIDA LA FONDA BACKGROUND: The public hearing for the Street Vacation 2006-043 was originally scheduled on the January 91h, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, however staff requested a continuance to allow sufficient time for notification of the public hearing per the City of La Quinta public notification procedures. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65402, the "Planning Agency" (City of La Quinta Planning Commission) shall make a finding that the proposed vacation is consistent with the City's General Plan and Circulation Element for any street right-of-way or public utility easement being vacated by the City Council. Nispero Properties, Inc., owner of Lots 68 and 77 on the north and south side of the public utility easement (Attachment 1), requested vacation of a portion of public utility easement pursuant to California Street and Highways Code Part 3 for Public Streets, Highways, and Service Easements Vacation Law, Section 8320-8325. The portion of public utility easement to be vacated will be incorporated in future development by Nispero Properties, Inc. for Village Use Permit 2005-032, Sun Vista Plaza. Additionally, the Parcel Merger 2006-476 for Lots 68 and 77 was approved by the Community Development Department on December 12, 2006. The portion of the public utility easement was dedicated for construction and maintenance of all public utilities on the Subdivision Map for Desert Club Tract, Unit 4 and accepted by Riverside County and said map recorded on November 2nd, 1946. The portion of the public utility easement is specifically described in Attachment 2 and is not needed by any utility companies for construction or maintenance purposes provided that CADocuments and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\StaffReport SV 2006-043.doc an easement is granted to Verizon California Inc. along the westerly property line of Lot 68 (Attachment 3). No other utility company expressed a desired relocated easement. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: The proposed vacation is categorically exempt under Section 15301, and not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS: The applicant has contacted potentially affected public utility agencies informing them of the proposed vacation. To date, no objection to the right-of-way vacation has been received; however an easement along the westerly property line of Lot 68 has been recorded in favor of Verizon California Inc. for future and/or relocation of facilities. FINDINGS: 1. The public utility easement vacation will not impact public utility agencies, provided easements are provided for the continued maintenance and operation of relocated public utilities. RECOMMENDATION:" Adopt Resolution 2007-_ finding that Street Vacation 2006-043 is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan. Attachments: 1 Vicinity Map 2. — Plat Map 3. — Verizon Easement Prepared by: BRIAN CHING, Associate Engineer CADocuments and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\StaffReport SV 2006-043.doc PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, THAT THE PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT WITHIN DESERT CLUB TRACT 4 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN CASE NO.: STREET VACATION 2006-043 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 23rd day of January, 2007, hold a public hearing to consider the request for vacation of a portion of Public Utility Easement off of Main Street north of Avenida La Fonda; and, WHEREAS, State Government Code Section 65402 requires that prior to streets being vacated by the City Council, the Planning Commission shall make a finding that the proposed public utility easement vacation is consistent with the City's General Plan; and, WHEREAS, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Finding confirming that the proposed public utility easement vacation is consistent with the City's General Plan: 1. The proposed public utility easement vacation will have no environmental effects that adversely impact the human population, either directly or indirectly, because the street segment is currently unused by the public and inaccessible to vehicles; and secondly, the act of vacating the public utility easement will have no physical environmental effect. 2. The public utility easement vacation will not impact public utility agencies, provided easements are granted for the continued maintenance and operation of relocated public utilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does find the proposed Street Vacation 2006-043, as shown on Attachments 1 and 2, is consistent with the City's General Plan for the reasons set forth in this Resolution provided Nispero Development, Inc. grants an easement to Verizon California Inc. for maintenance and construction of relocated facilities caused by said vacation. Planning Commission Resolution 2007_ Street Vacation 2006-043 Adopted: January 23,,2007 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 9T" day of January, 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R. EVANS Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-23-07\Nispero Street Vacation\SV 2006-043 PC Reso.doc ATTACHMENT 1 CALLE TAMPICO AIN ST u AVENUE 52 VICINITY MAP W A 5 H I N G T O N ATTACHMENT 2 'N tot 69 \ od aw N (LOT 66 'o as aus M8 21160) m. PU841C UTILITY EASEMENT i 1O RE VACATED � } — } \LOT LINE ABANDONED U �I— $ BY PARCEL MERGER o P.U.E. PER 2006-476 MB 21/60 � - / .A / for 79 (tornots tiw z DES CLUB /4 AV 21160) M� zJ �� AVEN I I7A CA FOkr ., _� 1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. When Recorded Mail To: VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. 3965 N. Clark Ave. — CAX02NE LONG BBACH, CA 90808 ATTN: Gina R. Uy APN No. 770-124-001 DUG # 2006-0919313 12/15/2006 08:00A Fee:13.00 Page 1 of 3 Recorded in Official Records County of Riverside Larry W. Uard Assessor, County Clerk 6 Recorder IIIlII IIIIIII III III IIiIII IIIII IIIIIII 111111111111 IN ATTACHMENT S R U PAGE SCE I VA I MISC LONG RFD I COPY M A L 1 465 1 426 PCOR NCOR SMF NCHG � 705 No Consideration and Value Less Than $100.00 No Documentary transfer Tax BY: VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC. R/W'AGENT GRANT OF EASEMENT THE GRANTOR (S), NISPERO PROPERTIES, INC., A California Corporation, hereby grant(s) to VERIZON CALIFORNIA INC., a Corporation bereinafter referred to as GRANTEE, its successors and assigns, an easement and right of way for the purpose of constructing, using, maintaining, operatin* altering, add to, repairing, replacing, reconstructing, inspecting and/or removing its facilities consisting of but not limited to: underground conduits, nranhoies, handholes, amplifiers, poles, pedestals, cables, wires, above and below ground vaults and enclosures, concrete pads, markers and other, appurtenances, fixtures and/or facilities (hereinafter sometimes called "equipment") necessary or useful for the transmission of electric and other forms of energy for communications, telecomuwnications, video, intelligence by electrical or other means and/or other purposes on, over, in, udder, across, along that certain real property situated in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside, State of Califotrva described as follows: The Westerly 10 feet of Lot 68 of Desert Club Tract Unit #4, as per Map recorded in Book 21, Page 60, of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of the Canny Recorder of said County. This legal description was prepared by Verizon California Inc., pursuant to Section 8730(c) of die Business and Professional Code. The GRANTEE, its successors and assigns and their respective agents and employees, shall have the right of ingress to and egress from said easement and every part thereof; at all times, for the purpose of exercising the rights herein granted and shall have the right to remove such plant growth as may endanger or interfere with the use of said easement. Such rights shall be reasonably exercised and the Grantee shall be liable for any damages negligently done by it to the above- desabedproperty. W.O.# 543-SPOAOAY R/W# 191-543-06 Page 1 EASEMENT Nispero Properties SS WHEREOF, sat'11 Grantor(s) has/have executed this instrunent this _day of 2O �c.cfYf ER GRANTOR(S): NISPERO PROPERTIES, INC., A California Corporation Name: Name: Title: STATE OF dOeWrOoeWiA ) COUNTYOF tQl✓Sips/�E ) •m before L, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally Appeared 2ggglE� A4. 0/1Z. and (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose mm*) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that hr/shelthey executed the same in his/her/their authorized . capacity(im) and that by his/her/their signatures) on the instrument the person(s), or entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. SIDNEYL RUSSELL _ Q1MYComm-EX;*!DSJLd16,2G08 mmbnim*160110 ry public -Collbaga Riverlde Courtly' (Above space for official notarial seal) W.O.# 543-8POAOAY R/W# 191-5.43-06 Page 2 Signature Notary Public CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California } ss. County of `fvER.Sl7.e J On . l/4 before me, S?D,t1 f/ • �Us54c N/�T�h¢cf%/fX�N able Name 7We d a8ker (e.g.,'&. 04, NoWy Publ personally appeared YOD65POr Alt. J-61 u, - -- Neme(e) a s0ner(a) ❑ personally known to me roved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence sloNEy RussEu Commlaslon�# 1501t49 t6 be the person(s) whose name(s) istare subscribed �fdo in *" @1t4 2 ! acknowledged to me that Is') l r. �71�. h �� the same in his/her/their Notary Public • Cclifornla a bfi,.,._ Acdy(ies), that by histhedtheir . and Rlvenide Counly My Comm. Expires Ju176; 2e08 ...V. 51 np1Ur `%r }r' ' elk.)=,9n .the.instrument'1hp person(s), or the 'ft fir, tr 6,1?htN, PQn. behalf of which person(s) acted, executed the iristrumarit {("- N S y hd4daCnd official sl al. �7��jlii���i>!/ Though the Description of Attached Title or Type of Document-- _ ''OPTMAIJ, by law, it may prove valuable -to persons refyug on the doament ✓al and reattachment of this fo m to anodref doaumenf. 7. _w ........, n...,,1 eJ.. w ;1.. ,_ f Document Date: �a If �0,6 - Number of -Pages:. Signers) Other Than Named Above: Capacfty(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer—..Title(s): ❑ Partner —❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Attorney In Fad Top of thumb here ❑ Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other. Signer Is Representing: 0200e NMme t4Wry Aseoci n• a= he Soto AV, P.O. BOX 2e02. OtuWwed Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer —Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑Limited ❑General ❑ Attorney in Fad ❑ Trustee Tap U e,lmb here ❑ Guardian or Conservator. ❑ Other. Signer Is Representing: ,.CA 51313.2402 ftem W. 58 Reord= Cag TA-Fm 1-80"76-M VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item ................... NOTICE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE CASE NO 2006-5204 Appellants.......... Jeffrey S. and Ardis L. Manning Location .............. 52-715 Avenida Navarro Request ............. Appeal of a Public Nuisance Determination regarding the violation of a recreational vehicle encroaching on the City right-of-way without a permit, parking in a location not zoned for vehicular parking, being improperly stored on a residential property and a patio cover that violates the Action ......... ,(.... To be continued to February 13, BI #B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 23, 2007 CASE NO.: SIGN APPLICATION 2006-1073 APPLICANT: ULTRASIGNS ELECTRICAL ADVERTISING REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO APPROVE BUSINESS IDENTIFICATION SIGNAGE FOR PETCO LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, WEST OF ADAMS STREET, IN THE ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER GENERAL PLAN: RC — REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ZONING: CR — REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS SIGN APPLICATION IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15311 (CLASS 11) OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) BACKGROUND: The One -Eleven La Quinta Center has an approved Planned Sign Program whose purpose is to ensure continuity of graphic elements throughout the development, and to provide maximum sign exposure to individual tenants without visual clutter, thereby enhancing the overall image of the project. Subsequently, the Sign Program allows national or regional tenants with more than five outlets to request Planning Commission approval to use their corporate sign and/or logo and to seek approval when the proposed sign deviates from the Sign Program. The applicant submitted plans for a main identification sign totaling approximately 106- 3'/2 square feet and a -supplementary sign totaling approximately ten and half square feet in December 2006 for Petco Animal Supplies (Attachment 1). It was determined that the proposal exceeded the allowable square footage allowed by the Sign Program and that the Planning Commission would need to make. a determination • on the proposed size. It was brought to the attention of the City that the sign was installed without approval by the applicant (Attachment 2). The applicant was made aware of the fact that the proposed signs were installed without approval from the Community Development Department and Planning Commission and without the required permit from the Building and Safety Department. Furthermore, the Building and Safety Department is withholding the Certificate of Occupancy until all approvals are cleared and a permit is issued. SIGN REQUEST: The applicant is proposing the standard corporate sign and logo for the Petco building site and is requesting approval of a main business identification sign ("PETCO"), a logo and a supplementary sign ("GROOMING'). "PETCO" is the main business identification sign with the logo proposed above it. The "GROOM ING",sign is proposed on the fascia east of the tower wall. The landlord has approved the proposed signs as submitted. The main business identification sign for Petco is proposed to be placed on the center tower wall on the southern building elevation facing Highway.111, centered above the five existing vigas (Attachment 3). The proposed sign will be red and consists of five - inch deep individual internally -illuminated channel letters, and will be approximately 4 feet in height and 18 feet 9'/z inches wide, totaling approximately seventy-five square feet (Attachment 4). The logo will be an internally illuminated blue cat and red dog with a black vinyl border placed above the word "PETCO", and measures 4 feet in height and 6 feet 3'/z inches wide and total approximately twenty five square feet (Attachment 4). The third sign "GROOMING' is a supplementary sign and is proposed on the southern building elevation centered on the fascia east of the tower wall. The proposed sign will be red with internally illuminated channel letters and will measure fourteen inches in height and 9-0'/2' feet wide totaling approximately ten and half square feet (Attachment 5). The main business identification sign totals approximately 106-3'/2 square feet and the supplementary sign is ten and half square feet. The total sign area equals 116-9'/z square feet. ANALYSIS: National and regional retail tenants along Highway 111 have historically applied for large business identification signs. Approvals were made based on sign size, location, proportionality to the building, as well as compliance with any applicable sign program. P:\Yvonne\SA - Sign Approvals\2006\SA 06-1073 Petco (STAFF REPORT).doc The following chart shows a comparison of the proposed sign to previously approved signs for similar sized major retail tenants along Highway 111: Side . fi , Sign Size ° " pare=feet , Store Frontage =feet Building Size. -s bare:feet Best Buy 108 125 17,000 Henry's Market 100 154 27,000 Stater Brothers* 180 245 42,600 Ross* 115 160 31,190 Marshall's 157 136 40,000 Circuit City 100 185 34,000 Bed Bath & Beyond 150 238 30,000 Rooms Express* 150 218 36,000 Big 5 Sporting Goods* 79 80 9,600 Average: 127 171 29,710 Petco* 116-9% 100 15,257 'One -Eleven La Quinta Center Sign Program Per the approved Sign Program for the One -Eleven La Quinta Center, tenants are allowed a maximum of fifty square feet per sign with the logo. The logo if proposed cannot exceed twenty five percent of the area. Staff concludes that the use of the proposed corporate sign and logo are acceptable but the square footage of the main business identification sign and logo need to be reduced for the following reasons: 1) the size and layout are not proportional to the available wall area and 2) The proposed signage is proportionally greater than previously approved signage for other major retail tenants along Highway 111 that have greater store frontage and larger building size. This can be alleviated by reducing the total square footage of the main business identification sign and logo from 106-31/2 to no greater than 80 square feet. The supplementary sign is proportional to signs and frontages in the One -Eleven La Quinta Center, as well as with other major retail tenants along Highway 111. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the use of the corporate sign and logo and that the Planning Commission adopt Minute Motion 2007-_, subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. The total square footage of the main business identification sign ("PETCO") and the logo shall be no greater than 80 square feet. The applicant shall install the approved sign on the southern building elevation at the approved location. PAYvonne\SA - Sign Approvals\2006\SA 06-1073 Petco (STAFF REPORT).doc 2. The square footage of the supplementary sign ("GROOMING'), shall be no greater than 10.5 square feet. 3. A building permit shall be obtained prior to any work on the sign being started. Prepared YVOTE FRANCO, Assistant Planner Attachments: 1. Sign Exhibit Site Plan. 2. Photograph of the building site. 3. Sign Exhibit Front Elevation. 4. Sign Exhibit Details for Main Sign and Logo. 5. Sign Exhibit Details for Supplementary Sign. PAYvonne\SA - Sign Approvals\2006\SA 06-1073 Petco (STAFF REPORT).doc III D D C) 3 m z w D s s r� S 3ay0 a c o y Nny O 111 O Z W 'Sv VO �• V NTaD ]0 p�+� p m m Nj W y i1V'. n y if.OTN Ow O = p w W O f m�O� _ C m S = m D -EM tr r_ 2 � S D I ^y� 93 rr- Gy mo m S _ m P • 5 a _ i o tNo ij n A O O YYY O wm� a � o u 999 N 1. O n Li 9 0 WO £N »s`�mSRO or s rr Ci NN p gg t Oiyy lll �1 SFL < y eZ n � �28 D z � o a c N n VI N rn e n C g rp m T 2 1Tw o a y O 3 ^ mpg ca H y p 9 C = � O C n n m m r a S � m c z . i A m 0 N � N \ 9 m W W S � O �n W g o Z II b c P � e AMPEEML mw o a si 3 3 yr .nw§is m k m to N y, C -Jn �29 6& ic^S3m si o. y D8 Ae mLa o yam4h �ms W�o�s�o a a S �pn p y2 o� 5 m oe 33 N — 5' air x' H Oggg z $ oZ A � v BI #C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 23, 2007 ITEM: SPHERE OF INFLUENCE - RIVERSIDE COUNTY SOI-R-02 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 34546 (COUNTY APPLICATION) APPLICANT: JOE BIRDSELL REQUEST: PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT PROPOSED IN THE CITY'S NORTH SPHERE OF INFLUENCE (SOI) LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DARBY ROAD AND ADAMS STREET (ATTACHMENT 1) BACKGROUND: As part of the City's cooperative planning program with Riverside County, most County projects proposed within City SOI areas will now be forwarded to the City for review and comment. Staff did receive a request for comments transmittal from the County on this project, and is presenting the map to the Planning Commission for review of the project, along with a copy of our comment letter to the County (Attachment 2). The objective is to convey the City's concerns to the County with a formal review by the Planning Commission. PROPOSED PROJECT: Tentative Tract Map 34546 (Attachment 3) is a 29-lot subdivision of ±8.5 acres, requiring a County zone change from R-1-12000 to R-1 (7,200 s.f. minimum lot size). The site is at the southwest corner of Darby Road and Adams Street. The project has access provided from Adams Street, with an emergency access only on Darby Road. The following comparison of County and City designations/standards is provided: Minimum Darby Road/ Private Jurisdiction Land Use Zoning Lot Size Adams Street Streets Riverside MDR R-1 (proposed) 7,200 SF 60' ROW Unknown County (2-5 UPA) R-1-12000 (ex.) 12,000 SF 40' CTC La Quint,, LDR RL 7,200 SF 60' ROW 28' curb to curb (0-4UPA) 36/40' CTC or to flow lines' Proposed 3.41 UPA R-1 7,201 SF 60' ROW 37' ROW Project 40' CTC 36' curb to curb ' Minimum required street width. At 2d' — no panvng Dorn sines; sZ - panuny une side only; 36' — parking both sides The proposal includes a County zone change from R-1-12,000 to R-1, to allow the minimum lot size at 7,200 s.f. Lot sizes range from 7,201 to 7,889 s.f. Darby Road is a local street (60-foot ROW, 40-foot curb to curb roadbed width) as designated by Riverside County. The City also shows Darby as a local street on the La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element, but has identified the potential for upgrading Darby Road to a Collector status. STAFF ANALYSIS: The letter provided to County staff, dated December 12, 2006, outlines the City staff concerns and comments on this project and the developer has provided to staff a letter addressing those comments (Attachment 4). Staff is seeking input from the Planning Commission as to any additional concerns, as well as to validate the staff comments as provided to the County. The primary issues as identified in our letter, and current status, are as follows: • The City would restrict certain units to single story, based on code requirements. The applicant has provided information showing that all units in the project will be single story. • Staff recommended a minimum 25-foot setback on all lots along Darby Road and Adams Street, which is 5 feet greater than LQ code requirements. The 25- foot setback is consistent with a previously approved project at the west end of Darby Road. The applicant claims that his project is based on County standards and that application of such a requirement would make the project infeasible. NOTE: This is not a code requirement but is a staff recommendation. • The City would prohibit any retention basins to be located in parkways or easements. The applicant has stated that the basins are not in any ROW or easements. • Intersection spacing should be 250 feet. The interior street and entry alignment should be redesigned. The applicant states that the design is acceptable to the County Planning Staff as designed. • Staff has recommended gating geometrics based on City standards. Applicant indicates that stacking seems excessive and that recommendation will change the gate design and widen the entry. At this time, the City would require a revised Darby Road street section, based on a 74-foot ROW. Staff has met with the County staff on this issue, as the County designates Darby as a local roadway at 60-foot ROW. The County position is that there is no ability to widen Darby to the City Collector status due to existing development and approvals. The County has agreed to condition an additional 5 feet of ROW to be provided in the event that the City annexes the map prior to its recordation. • Staff requested landscape plans for review. The applicant has provided the project design guidelines manual, which has been included in your packet. In regard to Darby Road, the Commission may want to consider a revision in the staff recommendation on the ROW issue, due to the current reliance on the County local road designation as a local street. The City has not conducted any in-depth analysis of a need for Darby Road as a collector at this time, and several County projects have been approved and/or built based on the local street standard. RECOMMENDATION: Affirm or revise the staff comments as provided to Riverside County by letter dated December 12, 2006. bit, Principal Planner Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Staff comment letter, dated 12/12/06 3. Tentative Tract 34546 layout (reduced) 4. Applicant response letter dated 12/20/06 cn Z O Z �4i Also Ro SITE WARING N MILES AVE zo HIGHWAY 1 111 VICINITY MAP N.T.S. ATTACHMENT #2 P.O.' Box 1504 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92247.1504 78-495 CALLS TAMPICO (760) 777-7000 LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 FAX (760) 777-7101-� December 12, 2006 Mr. Maurice Borrows; Project Planner Riverside County Planning Department Indio Office 82675 Highway 111, Room 209 Indio, CA 92201 RE: Proposed CI 7414 and Tentative Tract 34546 Dear Mr. Borrows: We have received your request for comment on the referenced application, and would like to thank you for the opportunity to review this project. According to your transmittal, the project is a 294ot subdivision of t 8.5 acres, requiring a zone change from R-1-12000 to R-1, 7,200 s.f. minimum lot size. The site is at the southwest corner of Darby Road and Adams Street. As part of our review process for all County applications within unincorporated areas designated as within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the City of La Quints, this project will be presented to the City's Planning Commission for their review and comment, in addition to the staff level review which we have conducted. While we are cognizant that the County of Riverside retains its land use authority under the current project review process, the City presents the following recommendations and comments in relation to City review standards,_ policies and procedures as they, would be applied to this project. LAND USE The current pre -annexation land use and zoning adopted by the City for this site is Low Density Residential, allowing up to 4 units/acre, with a minimum lot size of 7,200 s.f. The proposed project is consistent with the land use (LDR) and zoning (RQ designations. The La Quints zoning code has specific requirements pertaining to building heights for infill developments. On this tract, lots 17-20 and lots 24-29 should be restricted to single story unit designs, at a height not to exceed 22 feet. 1� r 2. City staff recommends minimum 20-foot front and rear yard setbacks be required. 3. City staff recommends that a 25-foot minimum setback be required at all lots along Darby Road and Adams Street. 4. City policy prohibits retention basins within any ROW or required setbacks. Retention basins will need to be located out of parkways/easements and'would need to be designed as amenities (active open space). Basins would be required to be walled or fenced. PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING 5. The applicant would be required to provide a preliminary grading plan for review, along with a hydrology study. On -site retention of all tributary storm water would be required. Additionally, overflow storm water would need to be addressed by the hydrology study. 6. The City Subdivision Ordinance requires a minimum 250-foot intersection spacing along Darby Road, which should be considered. 7. Intersection of the two cul-de-sac streets with the entry is not aligned, and should be redesigned. 8. Staff recommends that detailed geometries on gating and entry design be provided, as follows: A. Gated entries should be designed for three -car minimum inbound stacking, capacity (minimum 62 foot length, call box to street). B. Provide a full turn -around outlet for rejected vehicles, such that vehicles rejected at the gate can safely make a full turn -around movement (minimum 24 foot radius) out to the main street from the gated entry. A minimum 20-foot width would be required at the turn -around opening. C. Require two traffic lanes at the entry side of each gated access, one for residents and one for visitors, Each travel lane would be a minimum 20- foot total paved roadway width, or as required by the Fire Department. 9. The City would require a revised Darby Road street section, based on a 74-foot ROW, a 52-foot wide roadbed (curb -to -curb) width, and an additional 10-foot landscaped setback, in addition to. any widening necessary for deceleration lane improvements. It would be necessary to review all existing street improvement plans for Adams Street and Darby Road. 10. The City would require that additional ROW for Darby Road be dedicated with the tentative map, to include the remainder parcel to the west. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 11. The City requests that preliminary landscape plans be required by the County with this application, and that these plans be provided to the City for review: 12. Certain special studies, would be required with this application. A Phase 1 cultural resources survey would be required. City staff requests that any revised exhibits and/or or project redesign plans be re- submitted_to the City for. f_urther_.review.and comment, as well as anymore detailed plans prepared in response to this letter. We hope that these comments are helpful to you in processing this application. Should you have questions regarding this letter, please contact the undersigned at 760-777- 7069 (Fax 760-777-1233), or via e-mail at wnesbit@la-guinta.org. Very truly yours, Wallace Neshit Principal Planner WN/wn Encl. C: Joe Birdsell Bruce Cathcart Essi Shahandeh, Project Engineer Ed Wimmer, Public Works ATTACHMENT #4 Essi Shahandeh, Civil Engineer 45175 Panorama Dr., Suite "E" Telephone (EMO) 340.559E Palm Desert, CA 92260 Fax )760) 340-1121 DECEMBER 20, 2006 TO: WALLACE NESBIT, PRINCIPAL PLANNER CITY OF LA QUINTA, CA. P.O.BOX 1504 LA QUINTA, CA 92247-1504 78495 CALLE TAMPICO LA QUINTA, CA 92253 CC: JOE BIRDSELL(DEVELOPER),MAURICE BORROWS(RIV.CO) RE: TRACT 34546 DEAR WALLY, I RECEIVED YOUR MESSAGE ON MY CELL PHONE THAT YOU WOULD BE IN MEETINGS FOR THE NEXT FEW DAYS. I TALKED TO ERIC IN YOUR SECTION ALSO, TO TONY CALAROSSI AND ED WIMMER IN PUBLIC WORKS YESTERDAY REGARDING THE LETTER SENT TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ON DECEMBER 12, 2006. IN THE LETTER AND ACCORDING TO ED, YOU INTEND TO PRESENT THE TRACT TO YOUR PLANNING COMMISSION TO CREATE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THIS TRACT WHICH IS WITHIN YOUR SPHERE OF INFLUENCE. OUR QUESTIONS WOULD BE; ARE WE TO BE NOTIFIED OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS MEETING DATED AND BE INVOLVED? ARE THERE ANY FEES INVOLVED? WHAT IS THE CITIES OPINION OF THE WEIGHT THESE CONDITIONS WILL CARRY.WITH THE COUNTY'S COMMISSION? WE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS .INCLUDED IN YOUR LETTER AND WOULD PLEASE LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE ITEMS AT THE FIRST CHANCE YOU ARE AVAILABLE. ITEM 1. THE DESIGN MANUAL BEING FINALIZED AT THE TIME OF THIS CORRESPONDENCE RESTRICTS THE ENTIRE TRACT TO SINGLE STORY HOMES. ITEM 2. & 3. WE WOULD WANT TO RESERVE THE COUNTY SETBACKS ALONG THE SOUTH AND EAST BOUNDARIES OF OUR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. MANY OF THE EXISTING HOMES ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY ARE AT A 15 FOOT SETBACK AND ARE TWO STORIES HIGH. THE DESIGN THE DEVELOPER WOULD LIKE TO RETAIN IS A COURT YARD TYPE AT THE FRONT OF THE UNITS THUS PROVIDING SOME, PRIVACY FOR THE OWNERS. THIS STYLE WOULD REQUIRE THE REAR SETBACK TO BE LESS THAN THE 20 FEET YOU HAVE REQUESTED. ITEM 4. THE RETENTION BASIN IS NOT WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. AT THIS TIME THE I.I.D. DESIGNS ARE FUNDAMENTALLY COMPLETE AND DO NOT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SETBACKS/EASEMENTS. THE BASINS ARE TOO SMALL TO BE UTILIZED AS RECREATIONAL SPACE. THE ADDITION OF FACILITIES INSIDE THE BASIN WOULD ALSO REQUIRE A.D.A. ACCESS FURTHER ELIMINATING THE VOLUME WE REQUIRE TO MEET OUR STORM WATER STORAGE. ITEM 5. A PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGY STUDY AND PRELIMINARYGRADING PLAN WAS PREPARED FOR THE SITE AS PART OF THE COUNTY SUBMITTAL. THE GRADING IS SHOWN ON THE TENTATIVE MAP. THE HYDROLOGY STUDY IS VERY COMPLETE FOR THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN. WE CAN PROVIDE YOU A COPY IF YOU WERE NOT PROVIDED IT BY THE COUNTY. WE COMPLETELY RETAIN ALL OF THE FLOWS FROM OUR SITE AS REQUIRED BY THE BERMUDA DUNES SPECIAL STUDY BY C.V.W.D. THE OVERFLOWS , WOULD FOLLOW THE HISTORICAL PATTERN. THE NORTHEAST WOULD FLOW THROUGH THE ALLEY WHICH IS THE EXTENSION OF DARBY ROAD. THE SOUTHEAST WOULD FLOW ACROSS ADAMS AND EAST TO STARLIGHT LANE INTO THE BERMUDA DUNES COUNTRY CLUB. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE STARLIGHT DUNES TRACT ADJACENT TO OUR SITE. ITEM 6. THE ENTRIES ARE IN EXCESS OF 250 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF ADAMS STREET AND DARBY ROAD. THE MAIN ENTRY IS 531.06' SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION AND THE NORTH ENTRY IS 394.06' WEST OF THE INTERSECTION. THE NORTH ENTRY IS RESTRICTED TO AN EXIT ONLY. ITEM 7. THE DESIGN OF THE MAIN ENTRY FROM ADAMS STREET IS AN ENLARGED BULB. THE ANGLE OF THE ENTRY GATE POINTS THE VEHICLES TO THE WEST- SOUTHWEST UPON "EGRESS. THERE WILL BE AN ANGLED CROSSWALK/STOP LIMIT ATE THE INTERSECTION OF STREET "C". WE HAVE MET WITH MAJEED FARSHAD OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ON THE GEOMETRY AND HE IS COMPLETELY SATISFIED WITH ITS FUNCTIONALITY AND SAFETY. ITEM 8. A THREE CAR STACKING SEEMS EXCESSIVE FOR THE NON-RESIDENT ENTRY. WE HAVE PROVIDED FOR TWO CARS STACKED AT THE PHONE KIOSK AND FOUR CARS FROM THE GATE TO STREET FOR RESIDENCE. THE LETTER SOUND AS IF YOU WANT ANOTHER ISLAND SEPARATING THE RESIDENCE AND THE CALLERS WITH A 20 FOOT WIDE LANE FOR EACH. THIS BEGINS TO BALLOON THE ENTRIES WIDTH. THIS ENTRY IS VERY SIMILAR TO STARLIGHT DUNES ENTRY. ITEM 9.& 10. TALKING TO ERIC FROM YOUR DEPARTMENT, DARBY ROAD IS NOT DESIGNATED AS A GENERAL PLAN ROAD. YOU HAVE REQUESTED -A 74 FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND A 52 FOOT WIDE IMPROVEMENT WIDTH. THIS IS NOT CONSISTANT WITH THE APPROVED CONSTRUCTION OR THE CONSTRUCTED CURB ALONG DARBY ROAD. THE COUNTY HAS ALREADY APPROVED THE PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTION TO A 60 FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND A 40 FOOT WIDE IMPROVEMENT SECTION. THE NEWEST CONSTRUCTION AT PALM ROYAL WAS JUST BUILT. TO A 36 FOOT WIDE IMPROVEMENT ONLY MONTHS AGO. THE OTHER EXISTING CONSTRUCTED CURB CONSISTS OF SEVERAL 100'S OF FEET IN LENGTH LOCATED AS FOLLOWS; NURSERY ON THE NORTH SIDE AT 78-330 +/-, HORT TECH NURSERY ON THE SOUTH AT 78-351 +/-, KINGDOM HALL CHURCH AND RESIDENCE ON THE SOUTH AT 78-625 +/-, MOORE CIRCLE ON THE NORTH AT TRACT 23,742 AND THE CURRENTLY APPROVED BUT. NOT CONSTRUCTED IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE DUPLEX DEVELOPMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF DARBY ROAD AND ADAMS STREET. THIS TRACT HAS ONLY RECENTLY BEEN APPROVED AND WAS NOT ALIGNED OR ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE THIS ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY. DO YOU INTEND TO SHIFT THE ROADWAY COMPLETELY TO THE SOUTH? JOG IT ALL AROUND TO MATCH THE EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS? THE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT IS UNAWARE OF THE CHANGE TO A GENERAL PLANNED ROADWAY. IT MAKES NO SENSE WITH THE RECENT IMPROVEMENTS AT PALM ROYALE. THERE ARE BLOCK WALLS CONSTRUCTED AND STORM DRAINS INSTALLED. OUR PROJECT HAS ALREADY BEEN REQUIRED TO ADJUST ADAMS STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY ONTO THE SITE BECAUSE OF THE WALL AND CURB CONSTRUCTED BY THE COUNTRY CLUB AND NOW THE CITY WANT TO SHIFT ALL THE BURDEN OF ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF- WAY FOR THE NOT WELL THOUGHT OUT ALIGNMENT OF DARBY ROAD. WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. ITEM 11. PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANS ARE DONE AND AVAILABLE. WE CAN PROVIDE THEM TO YOU IF THE COUNTY HAS NOT. ITEM 12. "SPECIAL STUDIES PHASE 1" I ASSUME IS ARCHAEOLOGICAL. THIS WAS PERFORMED AND CAN BE PROVIDED IF THE COUNTY HAS NOT ALREADY. WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A MEETING ON THESE ITEMS AS SOON AS YOU ARE AVAILABLE. PLEASE GIVE US A CALL OR CONTACT VIA E-MAIL. THANKS FOR ANY HELP YOU CAN GIVE US. WE HAVE A DESIGN REVIEW MEETING TOMORROW, DECEMBER 21, 2006 AT 2:45 P.M. HOPE TO HEAR FROM YOU SOON. THANKS, ART GARDNER Essi Shahandeh, P.E.,Principal, RCE 47834 Date 12/20/2006 January 5, 2007 City Of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Re: Minor Use Permits / Casitas Attention: Mr. Doug Evans Director Of Community Development Dear Doug: JAN - 8 2007 In the past we have touched briefly on the subject of Minor Use Permits being a requirement in dealing with Casitas in home development projects. I offer further comment on the matter and will close with a recommendation for your review. As I understand it, the supposed need for the permit is two fold. One of which is to control the use of the Casita as being only a living space and the second is to safeguard the community from over occupancy and the like. Parking concerns, set backs etc are reviewed in this process. I also understand that should the Development require a Specific Plan, the developer can provide wording in the plan that would negate the requirement of a Minor Use permit on the subject houses. As a Developer in the Valley, albeit retired, I question the need for this permit process based on the following. I understand that here have been some recent changes in the State Of California's approach toward City enforcement of this type of permit. I feel it infringes on the home owners use of his property and contributes a good deal of extra work to process.. The Casita addition in fact is usually nothing more than an additional bedroom. It could be added to the house plans at a later date and plan checked as a revision to the original house drawings not unlike a commercial building. It would be subject to the normal plan check process and setbacks, parking etc would be accounted for. No need for a special permit as I see it. Additionally, I see the process as a cost and labor factor to the already overburdened Building Department who has to deal with it to say nothing of the developer on the other side of the counter in having his work load increased.. In closing, I would appreciate your review and comment on the above. Should you find my comments accurate and worthy, I suggest we look further into the process of removing the requirement. . It would be noteworthy if we could actually remove an unneeded process from the works. You don't see much of that nowadays. I await your highly valued opinion and comments. Respectfully submitted: Ed Alderson City Of La Quinta / Planning Commissioner a� F�OF'ft'� INTENT TO SPEAK FORM I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC COMMENTS: RE: L,, 1/v� AJ �W �7/9/I/ AGENDA ITEM NO.: RE: PUBLIC HEARING NO.: RE: I AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM I AM IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ITEM WRITTEN COMMENTS: (Optional) PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE (3) MINUTES WHEN SPEAKING!! DATE: / - Z.A -0 2 NAME: ADDRESS: RETURN THIS FORM TO THE RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE THE MEETING BEGINS. THE CHAIRMAN WILL CALL YOUR NAME AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. THANK YOU! NCAROLYMPlanning Com\INTENT TO SPEAK FORM.doc