Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2000 12 12 PC
Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-quinta.org A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California December 12, 2000 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2000-087 Beginning Minute Motion 2000-023 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public. hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes of the regular meeting on November 28, 2000, B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PRESENTATIONS: A. Presentation by Riverside County on their General Plan Update. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Item ................... MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT TO TITLE 8, BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION Applicant........... City of La Quinta Location............ City-wide Request ............. Amend Chapter 8.13, Water Efficient Landscaping. Action ............... Continue to January 23, 2000 B. Item .................. CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2000- 402, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-071, ZONE CHANGE 2000-069, AMEND THE VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINE BOUNDARY, AND VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-004 Applicant.......... Chapman Golf Development, LLC and the City of La Quinta Location .......... 1) Northeast corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive, and 2) on the west side of Eisenhower Drive between Calle Tampico to Avenida Montezuma, and 3) the northwest corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive. Request ........... Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, amend the General Plan and Zoning Designation from Low Density Residential to Village Commercial, and from Medium Density Residential and Cove Residential to Village Commercial, amend the Village Design Guidelines boundaries to include all referenced properties and development plans for a 16,222 square foot restaurant. Action .............. Resolution 2000-_, Resolution 2000 , Resolution 2000- , Resolution 2000- , Resolution 2000- C. Item ................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-686 Applicant........... Century -Crowell Communities Location............ West side of Jefferson Street, between Fred Waring Drive and Miles Avenue Request ............. Review of ten single family prototype architectural plans for a subdivision of 206 homes. Action ............... Minute Motion 2000- PC/AGENDA D. Item .................. STREET CLOSURE ON BUTTERCUP LANE EAST OF GOLDENROD CIRCLE Applicant.......... City of La Quinta Location........... Buttercup Lane east of Goldenrod Circle in the Cactus Flower subdivision Request............ Closure of vehicular traffic along a 100-foot long segment of Buttercup Lane, east of Goldenrod Circle. Action .............. Resolution 2000- VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item .................. FINDING OF GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY FOR 25 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT CAPITAL PROJECTS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65401 Applicant.......... Coachella Valley Water District Location .......... Various locations throughout the City Request ........... Finding of General Plan conformity Action .............. Resolution 2000- VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner discussion regarding City Council meeting of December 5, 2000. X. ADJOURNMENT PC/AGENDA MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA November 28, 2000 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Robbins who asked Commissioner Kirk to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Tom Kirk, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to excuse Commissioners Jacques Abels and Richard Butler. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez, Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: A. Chairman Robbins informed the Commission and public that the Specific Plan 94-025 Amendment #1, Parcel Map 28617, and Conditional Use Permit 99-047 for the Green property had been withdrawn and therefore was not agendized. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to confirm the agenda. Unanimously approved. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of November 14, 2000. Commissioner Kirk asked that Page 6, Item 8, correct the word "alleviate"; Item 10, corrected to read, "Commissioner Kirk restated Commissioner Tyler's question, could the Commission condition the project to have only six pumps instead of eight."; Page 15, Item #4 corrected to read, "If this was a local bank, for example, would the applicant be allowed the same latitude...... Staff stated he could request it if he has five or more branches. Commissioner Kirk stated his disagreement that national, or multi -tenant large companies ,get a G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd Planning Commission Minutes November 26, 2000 competitive advantage over small, or locally owned businesses." There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to approve the minutes as corrected. B. Department Report: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Environmental Assessment 2000-402 General Plan Amendment 2000- 071 Zone Change 2000-069 Village Use Permit 2000-004; a request of Chapman Golf Development, LLC and the City of La Quinta for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and development plans for a 16,222 square foot restaurant to be located at the northeast and southwest corners of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive and the west side of Eisenhower Drive from Calle Tampico to Avenida Montezuma. 1. Commissioner Kirk withdrew from the dias due to a possible conflict of interest. 2. Staff informed the Commission that a request had been received by the applicant to continue this item. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Robbins to continue the application to December 12, 2000, as requested. Unanimously approved. B. Sian Application 93-197, Amendment #2; a request of Thane International to amend the Plaza Tampico Sign Program to allow tenants to use corporate sign colors and permit major second story tenants identification signs on building entry towers located at 78-140 and 78- 150 Calle Tampico (Plaza Tampico). 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if staff had a picture showing the location of the proposed signs as the exhibit on Attachment 4 does not appear to look like the facade of the building. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, :2000 3. Commissioner Kirk asked if the exhibit was a photo. Staff stated it was a xerox of a photo. Commissioner Kirk questioned that he thought the Housing Authority had a sign on the tower part of the as well. Staff stated that presently there are no signs on any of the towers above the parapet. The first floor tenant, the Housing Authority takes up the first floor and the second floor would be allowed a second sign with approval of this request. Commissioner Kirk noted for the Commission that the exhibit was not a recent photo, or the Housing Authority sign had been removed. To update the Commission, there is a large Housing Authority sign above the first story on the tower element. 4. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. There being no one present, Chairman Robbins asked if anyone else wanted to speak regarding this project. There being no public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if other two story office buildings in the City, allowed second story tenants signs. Staff stated it is dependent upon the sign program. With the Bougainvillea building they were allowed second story signs under their sign program, otherwise the Zoning Code does not allow it. The Code allows it if the second floor has a walkway balcony off the street. Commissioner Kirk stated his concern for sign proliferation. This does seem to be appropriate for a major tenant, but having two signs on a tower element is generally not appropriate on an office building where the Commission tends to look for signage where there is access and restrict signage on second floor elements. He would hate to have this become a precedent. In addition, the signage on this building are not attractive as it is. There is signage on various locations on the building with very little consistency, therefore, in many ways he is reluctant to approve the request. 6. Commissioner Tyler stated there had been a lot of concern raised regarding second floor tenants of the Bougainvillea building because they were not going to have visibility. We are trying to be a "business friendly" City, they were allowed the second story signs. He agrees that exceptions have been made, but this tenant is a major contributor to the City and the signs are already a mixture. GAWPDOCSTC11-28-OO.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 7. Commissioner Kirk stated that is where he is concerned. This is a significant business to the community, but that gets into concerns regarding whether they were allowing one thing for one company and not something for another. This is a value judgement that makes him nervous. Having one sign, whether Thane or Housing Authority, would be appropriate. The point with the Bougainvillea building was that there were going to be retail tenant on the second floor in a retail setting. Here it is an office complex where the sign does not denote a company where you would pull in to purchase something. He feels strongly that all businesses be treated equally and he does not think the rationale is strong to allow second floor signage on office buildings per the Zoning Code. 8. Chairman Robbins stated he shares both concerns. In this instance he believes the sign is appropriate. 9. Commissioner Kirk asked if Thane was leasing 100% of the second floor. Staff stated yes. Commissioner Kirk stated the sign program is written for any tenant with 50% of more occupancy. He would rather changed the sign program that if a tenant is leasing 100% of the second floor they can have one sign on the tower. It will not change the number of signs, but restricts the signage to only the large major tenants. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Minute Motion 2000-021 approving Sign Application 93-197 Amendment #2, as amended: a. Second floor level tenants are not permitted exterior building signs, unless the business leases 100% of the upstairs floor area. Unanimously approved. C. Environmental Assessment 2000-407 and Tentative Tract Map 24197; a request of Century Crowell Communities for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and the subdivision of 63± acres into 206 single family and other miscellaneous lots located generally on the west side of Jefferson Street, between Fred Waring Drive and Miles Avenue. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff had discussed with the applicant how the storm water retention would be retained if the City's park site was not allowed. Staff stated no. Commissioner Kirk asked if the traffic circulation on the three Arterial Streets was consistent with the circulation plan that was recently discussed in regard to local versus regional circulation. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated yes, with respect to the Arterial Streets they are not allowed to have a full turn movement on Fred Waring. It would lead to the potential of having a signal. The General Plan does not allow full turning movement on Jefferson Street between Fred Waring Drive and Miles Avenue. They will have three of the four turning movements; a right turn in/right turn out, and left turn in. The only full turn movement is on Miles Avenue which matches up with the main entrance to the project on the south side and it will ultimately be signalized when warranted. Commissioner Kirk asked if a traffic generation model was prepared on this project. Staff stated no. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to identify potential traffic trip ins and trip beginnings, and where staff expected major flows to occur on this project. Staff stated people will take the shortest route to get where they are going. He went on to describe the different routes that could be taken. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to describe the traffic calming techniques that are proposed. Staff stated on public streets parking is allowed on both sides of the street. When the street is wide enough for parking it makes it inviting to speeding. On private streets they are allowed to be narrower with no parking on the street and leave it to the HOA to enforce it. The City therefore, tries to use different techniques to slow traffic down on the public streets. In this instance the City will be utilizing "chokers". The street is narrowed at the intersection and at the curb return, which is the radius, it is pushed out toward the center of the street to eliminate the parking at the intersection. In addition, the main street is curvilinear with 300 foot radius curves to encourage slower speeds. He went on to describe where the chokers would be constructed and where stop signs would be used. Commissioner Kirk asked if other traffic calming techniques such as humps or bumps were considered. Staff stated not at this time. There are other cities who have tried these and they have GAWPDOCSTC11-28-OO.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 found them to cause more problems than they solved and are now removing them. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was another way to provide alternative curb cut designs where we could provide narrow streets. Staff stated this will provide drainage problems and as this is the first time it has been done on a subdivision with public street, there is no policy in the General Plan to allow it. Therefore, staff has gone with the traffic calming techniques at this time. The City Council is updating the General Plan and some of these techniques may get more discussion during that process. Commissioner Kirk stated the City is looking at narrower streets in parts of the City on public streets with alternative curb cut designs, would it be appropriate to apply them here. Staff stated they come with problems. Narrowing streets does slow the traffic down and the cut outs for parking does cut down on some of the opportunities for parking and forces people to park in the pockets. Commissioner Kirk stated he was suggesting both options. Discussion followed on possible alternatives. 3. On the drainage basin Commissioner Kirk asked if there were alternatives to the use of turf for drainage basins as they do use a lot of water. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated some agencies do not require the basins to be landscaped, but require them to be deeper and are not used by the public. The City wants to allow it to be used by the residents. They are designed to be a combination park/retention basin. Commissioner Kirk asked if the developer was being given credit for a park in the retention area. Staff stated the developer will either dedicate land or pay the Quimby fees. In this instance they are putting in the park. The City has tried other landscaping concepts in retention basin on an interim basis and shrubbery has been used with drip irrigation, but it becomes more expensive to maintain than the turf. You can also get erosion of the slopes. 4. Chairman Robbins asked who maintains the retention basin. Staff stated that prior to the adoption of Proposition 218, the City maintained them. Since the passage of Proposition 218, the burden is on the developer who in turn records a declaration and the property owners within that subdivision will pay into an escrow account for maintenance of the basin. The City has consistently required them to be turfed to have the park environment. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 5. Commissioner Tyler stated that in the Environmental Assessment discussion of the staff report, some concern was expressed about the proximity of the access point on Jefferson Street to the alleged entrance to Heritage Palms across the street in the City of Indio, and currently there is nothing but a block wall on the east side. Staff stated the commercial area is at the corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, not at this location. Commissioner Tyler stated that with the turning restriction at this location, it is a non -issue. Staff stated that was correct, the well does go past this access making it no problem getting the left turn in at this location, provided the City of Indio agrees with the island. 6. Chairman Robbins asked if this had been coordinated with the City of Indio. Staff stated the City conditionally allows it, so it is up to the developer to approach the City of Indio to approve it. 7. Commissioner Tyler asked if it would be incorporated into the design plans for the widening of Jefferson Street. Staff stated it could be. Currently it is not. It is up to the developer. Commissioner Tyler stated the previous tentative tract map has expired, but his understanding was that the circulation pattern did connect to Buttercup Lane? Staff showed the aerial photo of the area and explained the street networking of all the associated tracts. Different streets have different priorities and serve different purposes. Fred Waring Drive, Jefferson Street, and Washington Street are Arterial Street and their primary purpose is to get people across a large area and this is why the City restricts the turning movements. In order to mitigate this, the City tries to use internal circulation from one tract to another and not clutter up the Arterial Streets with signals. Commissioner Tyler stated he is concerned that when you stand on the eastern terminus of the existing Dandalion Street and look east, you look down 15-20 feet. Staff stated this was because of the sewer requirements. If that subdivision had waited to develop it could have been tied into this tract, but it did not happen that way which created the high differential which makes the street somewhat steep. It will create some large steps in the pads as they come down. It will be creating site viewshed restrictions for the new tract only. Discussion followed regarding retaining walls and perimeter walls. 8. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Marty Butler, representing Century Crowell Communities asked if she could speak after the public comment. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-00.wpd 7 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 9. Chairman Robbins asked if anyone else wanted to speak regarding this project. Mr. Donald Hay, 44-155 Goldenrod Circle, stated he has appreciated working with staff and it is well represented. They would express the same appreciation to Century Crowell Communities. When they were purchasing their home, they were trying find a family community and found it in Cactus Flower. They did ask the City what would happen to Buttercup Lane where it dead ended. They were told to expect meandering streets with very low traffic and not a major impact to the neighbors. Now what they are seeing is a dramatic change to what they were told. He suggested that instead of Buttercup Lane being continued through and connecting with another street that will be a direct access to Fred Waring Drive or Jefferson Street, it could be redirected to meander around in the proposed development and not provide the direct access to the major Arterial. This is what they expected. He went on to explain how he thought the traffic circulation would be. Currently, there are two large retention basins on either side of Buttercup where it dead ends into the proposed tract. They are greatly used by the neighborhood children for play as well as for property owners with dogs. To have this street become a major street where these children are playing is terrifying. He asked if the chokers have been used successfully anywhere in La Quinta. Staff stated not in La Quinta. Mr. Hay stated he did not want to experiment on his children. There is too much traffic going by their park. Currently, there is no traffic on this road because it is a deadend. Century Crowell has told them they have no objection to changing this to a footpath or cul-de-sac. In reviewing the proposed tract, there are ten culs-de-sac. Why are there so many cuts -de -sac instead of connecting the streets together. The Planning Commission should not support this project. They are perfectly happy not having this access opened. They are not willing to have experimentation used to slow traffic down in his neighborhood. 10. Commissioner Kirk asked staff if meandering streets were used as suggested by Mr. Hay would there be more or less traffic into the existing neighborhoods. Staff stated the purpose is to create a circuitous pattern. The more circuitous you make it, the more homes you run the traffic by. Commissioner Kirk stated then that circuitous could be positive for the existing development or it may be detrimental. Staff stated that if you make it circuitous so that you never want to use it, it would help the existing development, but it would be an disadvantage to others. Discussion followed G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 regarding alternative street designs. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the City has done curb pop outs at the gated community on 48`h Avenue and the City does not believe using traffic calming techniques are experimental. Although it is the first time in La Quinta, it is widely used all over the country. Traffic calming methods are being given a lot of attention over the last decade. Community Development Director Jerry Herman showed the previously approved tract that had expired and the traffic circulation pattern connection to Buttercup Lane and hove it meandered through the project similar to the proposed tract. 11. Commissioner Tyler asked how many homes were proposed for the prior tract. Staff stated 240 homes which included the ten acres of commercial. The ten acres are removed from the proposed tract. Mr. Hay noted the existing park benefitted more Cactus Flower residents where now it benefits the property values of Century Homes so that it keeps the homes further away from the new commercial area. 12. Mr. John Johnson, 79-590 Marigold, stated he donated his time to Mr. Hay. 13. Ms. Michele Baker, 44-150 Goldenrod Circle, stated she has been here ten years and the busiest day of the week is Thursday, because it is trash pick up, pool cleaners and gardeners arrive, and Schwan delivers. On Miles Avenue they have two new schools being constructed. This will create a lot of traffic using Buttercup Lane so they do not get caught up in the school traffic. She does not believe anyone has thought about the amount of activity that is being created. She does not want speed bumps, stop signs, or any other method of traffic deterrent. She only wants the street blocked off. 14. Mr. Brad Phoenix, 44-120 Goldenrod Circle, stated the method of squeezing the streets is not going to work. At Las Vistas and Fred Waring Drive there was a right turn only and it created a problem because everyone ignored it and turn left anyway. Currently on Miles Avenue and Coldbrook Lane you have the same problem. The traffic flow for the proposed tract with right turns outs will not work because people will not follow them. This area was not designed to handle the traffic from the 206 homes. The fire G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 9 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 department stated their response time is 8-10 minutes and this is unacceptable. The lots are smaller and there are six homes where other tracts in this area only have five creating a "Cove -pike" environment. Discussion followed about setbacks. 15. Mr. Tom Huebner, 44-215 Goldenrod Circle, stated Desert Club Estates at Washington Street and Calle Tampico had a similar issue with La Quinta Fairways, and the City found a way to prevent this from happening. He does not want the additional traffic. He has no objection to coming back out to Dune Palms Road to go where he needs to go. He has no opposition to the development, his only concern is the safety of their children. 16. Ms. Nancy Kelly, 44-345 Willow Circle, stated they bought their home in this location because it was a nice quiet neighborhood. They are not opposed to the new project, but does not see how traffic coming from these homes will benefit anyone in their area. They will have to deal with all the additional traffic. No one drives their car drives under the 25 mph speed limit in this area. 17. Mr. Carlo Lombardelli, 44-430 Buttercup Lane, stated he concurs with what has been stated. 18. Mr. Jim Snellenberger, 79-720 Iris Circle, stated currently, there is a problem at the intersection of Buttercup Lane and Blazing Star. That needs to be addressed before whether any development takes place. He concurred with staff that if the traffic was redirected it could solve this problem. 19. Mr. Bruce Kay, 79-710 Iris Court, stated he was opposed to the whole plan because we are losing our desert to tract development. We are not considering the development of La Quinta with the development of these little houses. Now a school is going to be built on Dune Palms Road. He does not see why this property including the commercial portion, could not be a wonderful Golden State Park. The City needs a beautiful park which would give it aesthetic quality. 20. Ms. Anne Kinstle, 79-685 Buttercup Lane, stated she lives at the corner and on numerous occasions while backing out of her garage, someone is flying around the corner. The corner is cut constantly and is really dangerous. To add another 500 homes going past her house is a nightmare. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 10 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 21. Mr. George Fercana, Jr., 44-030 Sweet Bush Lane, stated he is totally opposed to this project. First we need to think of all the kids who ride the bus and walk home on that street. There are so many children who play in the area of Buttercup Lane and the grassy hills of the retention basin. With the road open to through traffic it would eventually lead to casualties. He plays there all the time with his friends and cars and kids do not mix. There are just too many speeding cars going by in this area. He fears for all the kids who play and live in the area. 22. Mr. F. Patrick Sheridan, 44-585 Blazing Star Trail, asked why some of the culs-de-sac going east and west can not be opened to Jefferson Street and another road leading out to Miles Avenue and another road to Fred Waring Drive creating more street access. He had an occasion to call the paramedics and it took 20 minutes to find the house because they could not find their way to the house because there is one way in and out. A little more access is needed and should be considered. With the response time of the Paramedics and Fire Department, 20 minutes is too long; there needs to be another Fire station in this area of La Quinta. 23. Mr. Henry Schwartz, 44-030 Dalea Circle, emphasized the number of children playing on these streets. Cars and kids do not mix. If this thoroughfare is added it is only a matter of time before there is an accident. At night there is not a lot of lighting and when events such as Halloween come, kids are all over the streets and poses a hazard. Therefore, no connection should be made between the two tracts. 24. Mr. Jim Moran, 44-030 Mariposa Court, stated they have lived in Cactus Flower for eight years and everyone should be asking what was the original intent of Blazing Star and Buttercup Lane. How many homes were intended to serve. What is the effect if another 200 homes are added. Need to look for solutions based on the original intent of Blazing Star. We need to look at the safety of the children and the intent of what that street was made to serve when the original neighborhood was built. He is concerned about his children and the traffic flow. The City needs to look at full access onto Fred Waring Drive. Signals are not always the solution to slow traffic down, but at Las Vistas and Fred Waring Drive there is access and that is what needs to happen here. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 11 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 25. Mr. Randy Emerson, 44-180 Dalea Circle, stated he and his wife purchased their home because they liked the self containment of Cactus Flower. They liked the wide streets and no through traffic. Once the construction starts and the homes are sold, most of those 206 homes will have two cars or a total of 412 cars. To increase that amount of traffic into their development, when there is no free access onto Fred Waring Drive or Jefferson Street, that leave only Miles Avenue. That creates his concern that his only street, which is Blazing Star, which has full access onto Dune Palms Road, will have a signal. Then more and more signals. Cactus Flower is not street lighted and the only light is from the homes themselves. As a contained community this is fine, but if opened up to more and more traffic, it could be unsafe. 26. Mr. David Sasaro, 44-245 Sweet Bush Lane. asked if it was true that Century, owner of the project, had no problem with closing the street. Chairman Robbins stated the developer would address this when she spoke. 27. Mr. Frank Saha 44-065 Calico Circle, stated that on his cul-de-sac there are 20 kids under the age of ten, five or six dogs, and four or five different cats. He likes his community as it is now. When he leaves in the morning people are taking their daily walks in and out of the culs-de-sac, not afraid of traffic. Obviously he is opposed to the opening of this street and he is sure something else can be worked out. No one currently lives there now and they was there first. They should be given preference. 28. Ms. Dena Langhorn, 44-245 Goldenrod Circle, stated this will affect her directly as she lives at the corner of Goldenrod Circle and Buttercup Lane. She does not have children, but watches them day and night playing in the park in front of her home and one of her favorite things to do is to sit and watch them play. She cringes at the thought of having more traffic. She hopes something can be done to solve this problem before something happens where we will have to work defensively instead of proactively. 29. Mr. Paul Lord, 44-240 Calico Circle, stated there are a lot of children and everyone likes to watch them play. Another issue for him is that his wife suffered a stroke and part of her therapy is to walk. She walks slowly, very slowly and if this is put through it will confine their walking to their own circle. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-00.wpd t2 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 30. Mr. Ray Kelley, 44-345 Willow Circle, stated the number of culs- de-sac in the proposed development is overwhelming. It seems the Cactus Flower development is having to sacrifice some of their privacy and some of the traffic because this development wants private cul-de-sacs. Maybe the percentage of accesses per the number of homes be equal to the new development. It appears they are having to supply ways for these people to get out. With the stop lights, it is a concern to some of the people that it will hold up traffic. If traffic lights were added to free up some of traffic on these streets and timed at a certain speed, maybe would help. 31. Ms. Courtney Mains, 44-030 Dalea Circle, stated that if this is allowed she will not be able to play with her friends as she will not be able to cross the streets. 32. Ms. Marty Butler, representing Century Crowell Communities, stated she was very involved with the development of Cactus Flower and she is very proud to see these people who are now living in this development. They have worked with their engineers and City staff and are willing to construct this street through and will defer to City's staff and their engineers for their guidance. Other than this issue, their concerns are Condition #63. This condition requires a traffic signal on Miles Avenue for their exit onto this street. Her concern is that they have been in contact with the City of Indio and they do not intent to require the developer on the east side of Jefferson Street to pay any funds to construct a traffic signal at this location. As there will be a median she would want to propose there be either a right turn only and have the median block the turning movements to the left, or stipulate in the condition that the signalization would as warranted if the City of Indio is interested. Condition #53A.i, is a concern because this condition requires them to pay a cash fee for the outer 20 feet of pavement, curb, and gutter. Again, the developer to the east has been conditioned in a different format where if the project is not done within a two year period, he is responsible for his lane. She was hoping to have a similar condition. She has met with staff a number of times to ascertain their costs and both of these conditions were not considered nor were they budgeted. The signal would cost $80,000 and the lane of pavement would be $80,000. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 13 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 33. Commissioner Kirk asked if they are not able to use the retention basin as a park site, what will they do for retention. Ms. Butler stated they do not need to use the park site for retention as the retention basin is adequate. Staff had no objection. 34. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 35. Commissioner Kirk stated the points raised are good and valid. He was particularly interested by the comment that the original intent here was for the through streets. This development would be linked with nearby developments within this section of property. With that in mind we need to meet the original intent and in fact connect these developments together. At the same time, it has to be done in a way that is sensitive to the existing property owners. Even though there are no property owners in the proposed tract, the Commission needs to consider both. He is generally in support of the project. City staff has really worked aggressively to address traffic issues. He too would be concerned about the issues that had been raised. He believes the proposals presented by staff are intelligent and creative and are not experiments. He would support the project based on two conditions: 1) strongly support the traffic calming measures; and 2) that this project move on to the City Council and ask staff to work with the applicant on alternatives for circulation within the new development, but still connecting to the older developments. Mr. Hay suggested that maybe some different circulation patterns are one way to meet the original intent and yet discourage fast and increased traffic through this development. Pass this proposed development on to the City Council with a strong recommendation to staff that they work with the developer to prepare alternative circulation plans that continue to connect the development, but encourage traffic calming, slowing of traffic and discourage fast through trips. 36. Commissioner Tyler stated one of the most difficult problems the Commission faces is every time a new development is proposed we hear the same story; "this is our community and we have lived here for ten years, etc" and we forget that there is a piece of ground there that somebody owns and has to be developed to be financially viable for them. He too would like to turn it into a park, but does not believe that it is economically viable for either the G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 14 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 City or the property owner. We have to remember La Quinta consists of a lot of neighborhoods of which Cactus flower is one. It is indeed one of the earlier developments. It is a !nice development with curving streets and he agrees with one statement that it is extremely dark at night. However, you cannot say, "We were here first and everyone else stay away." It doesn't work that way. As Commissioner Kirk suggested, we need to find a way that mitigates their concerns and also pave the way for future residents that will live in this new area. Several have expressed concerns for an approved access for emergency vehicles. He would suggest that if anyone lived along Goldenrod you would have faster access. Many expressed concern about signals, at the moment there are no signals proposed for any of the three accesses for this development. Traffic signals are not planned around the City without meeting the requirements for installation. Several suggested more access to the perimeter streets rather than having people coming through Cactus Flower. Staff has explained the purpose of certain streets and the purpose of Fred Waring, for example, is to move as much traffic as possible. Every time you install a full turn movement, you slow that traffic down and defeat the purpose. What is presented meets the City's regulations. He has detailed concerns such as street names, Condition #6 it calls for the existing streets that are connected to the new development, the new development will carry the old name to avoid confusion. He would suggest that Dandalion Street, the condition should be expanded to require Dandalion Street to go to the east corner. He is concerned about the proposed street name Hermitage Circle, as it is already an existing name and should be changed. In regard to Condition #63 he would suggest it be expanded to, "if and when a signal is warranted by both the Cities of La Quinta and Indio.." Beyond these suggestions, he is in general agreement with the plan. In regard to the playground retention basins, he would suggest they be mitigated by installing wrought iron fencing along the street to minimize the traffic impact. 37. Chairman Robbins stated he disagrees with his fellow Commissioners. This project have five access points for 209 plus or minus units. There are many developments within the City that have more units and less access points. In general, in his opinion, the City requires too much access between communities. He supports the property owners, not because they have lived there for ten years and the streets have not gone through, but he does not believe there is a need for the connecting streets to go G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd t5 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 through. If the communities are designed properly, and he believes this community is designed fairly well, that these connecting streets would be just as well, designed as cul-de-sacs. It does not add anything to either community to have the through streets. He could not support the project with the access: on Buttercup Lane opened. 38. Commissioner Tyler stated the applicant has stated they have no objection to not putting the street through, would staff support this. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that when Cactus Flower was first developed on this forty acres, they did not have any access onto Fred Waring Drive. We forced them to take access off Dune Palms Road. The idea was to give each neighborhood access points. It is the eastern portion of Cactus Flower that would benefit the most to having the connection to the new project. However, after going into the neighborhoods, he understands their desire to keep it a secluded neighborhood. It was staff's purpose in requiring the street to go through it give Cactus Flower residents the access onto Fred Waring Drive. What has been realized is that the residents of Cactus Flower have learned to live without the access onto Fred Waring Drive and prefer to keep it that way. The new project had good access to the Arterial streets. Staff does support keeping the access on Dandalion Street open because they have a restricted turn movement and the median in front of the schools will be built. Commissioner Tyler stated that originally the first phase of Cactus Flower only had one access point onto Dune Palms. Phase two gave them a second access and he was sure everyone started using it. Then a third street, Verbena was constructed to Miles Avenue for the Wildflower development and he is sure it was used also. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that by closing the street it will put some pressure on staff to explain why some of these developments were not given better access to the major Arterial streets. If the street is closed, some mitigation issues would need to be addressed. Once travel routes are established in a neighborhood, the residents learn to live with them. When the raised medians are built it will help to stop some of the traffic darting out onto the Fred Waring Drive where it is prohibited. 39. Commissioner Kirk stated that with that clarification, he was willing to support this project based on staff's support to close Buttercup Lane. G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 16 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 40. Commissioner Tyler asked that since there was no street vacation application before the Commission, could the project be conditioned to be closed off. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated he would let the Senior Engineer answer that question. The issue is whether or not the Commission wants to allow pedestrian access at that entrance. One option is to have the asphalt removed, a sidewalk installed, and opening the wall to allow pedestrian movement east and west. Commissioner Tyler asked who would be responsible for doing this. Ms. Marty Butler stated they would accept the responsibility. Staff went on to explain that since the developer is willing to accept the responsibility, they could be conditioned to do this. 41. Commissioner Kirk asked staff about the applicant paying half of the signal fee, Condition #63. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that whenever there is a full turning movement on an Arterial street, you open yourself to meeting warrants before construction can take place. The City's Development Impact Fee anticipates putting in signals at major intersections which already exist and the City knows a signal is needed. What is not clear is which signals will be developer driven and when staff has those occurrences, the developer is expected to mitigate that impact. It has been suggested that a quarter of the cost for the signal be borne by the developer, but in this case there are only two developers at this location and that is why staff conditioned them to pay one half the cost. In regard to the City of Indio not conditioning the developer on the east side to pay the other half, perhaps they are planning to pay the cost themselves. Commissioner Kirk asked what would happen if that did not happen for ten or 20 years. Staff stated that at that time the neighborhood would be established and staff would know what the traffic patterns were and whether or not it would meet warrants. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant's money was then refunded with interest. Staff stated the developer retains the actual funds. The City has them post bonds to hold the funds in place. 42. Chairman Robbins stated it seems that other residents of another tract will have the benefit of using the signal and should be responsible for paying part of the cost. Staff stated they could research to see if other developments were conditioned to pay a portion of the signal, but there could be a proration. Community Development Director Jerry Herman asked Senior Engineer Steve G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 17 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 Speer if a street closure or vacation would be required to close off Buttercup Lane. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it would be a street closure. Community Development Director Jerry Herman asked is staff was recommending a cul-de-sac or what? Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it needed to be a cul-de-sac so that emergency vehicles and trash trucks can turn around, or redesigned in an "L" shape. 43. Commissioner Tyler asked about the developers concern regarding the improvements on Jefferson Street. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) is not paying the full cost of widening Jefferson Street. 75% will be funded CVAG and 25% by each of the cities. It is a matter of timing. What staff has told the developers is that If they develop their project after the Jefferson Street contract is awarded and construction is underway, the developer will not be conditioned to participate in that cost. If the contract is not awarded, they will be required to do so. It will be prorated on the amount of money the City contributes. 44. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-083 recommending to the City Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2000-407. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Abels and Butler. ABSTAIN: None. 45. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-084 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 24197, as amended. a. Condition #6: Street names shall continue between tracts eliminating Virginia Street. b. Condition #63: "...as warranted by the Cities of La Quinta and Indio. C. New Condition: The applicant shall process a Street Closure pursuant to applicable Street and Vehicle Code sections and shall reconstruct the road as determined appropriate by the City Engineer with a pedestrian access between their tract and Cactus Flower. G:\WPDOCS\P(:11-28-00.wpd 18 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Abels and Butler. ABSTAIN: None. Chairman Robbins recessed the meeting at 9:23 p.m. and reconvened at 9:28 p.m. D. Conditional Use Permit 2000-052; a request of Wal-Mart Stores to allow 35 metal containers for the temporary storage of holiday merchandise to be located at 78-950 Highway 111, within the One Eleven -La Quinta Shopping Center. 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked how long the containers have been in place. Staff stated since September. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if the request addresses the pallets or boxes stacked against the containers. Staff stated no, but they would be removed. 4. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Oscar Rubio, Walmart Manager, stated that as the City has grown, so have they. In order to meet the demand of their customers they have to have a minimum of 35 containers as they cannot plan for all the requests they receive. They just received an order for 1200 specialty items and they will need containers to hold these until they are picked up. They will work with the City to the best interest of both the City and Walmart. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant had been contacted by the City regarding the pallets. Staff stated they have been working with all the merchants on Highway 1 1 1. Mr. Rubio stated they have been addressing the issues as the City brings them to their attention. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant wanted this request granted for every year at this time. Mr. Rubio stated yes. Commissioner Kirk asked why they did not expand the store to accommodate their growth. Mr. Rubio stated currently it is in process, but it is not fiscally feasible at this time. They are looking to expand in about two years. G:\WPDOCS\P(:11-28-OO.wpd 19 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 6. Commissioner Tyler asked if these containers would eliminate the high stacking inside the store. Mr. Rubio stated this has not been a practice since he has been manager. Commission Tyler asked if stacking would be on top of the containers. Mr. Rubio stated it would go away. Commissioner Tyler asked if this was normal to approve an application after the fact. Staff stated they are trying to work with the applicant, but no, normally the applicant should apply first before bringing in the containers. 7. Chairman Robbins asked if anyone else wanted to speak regarding this project. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 8. Commission Kirk stated he has a hard time rewarding someone after the fact. He has a problem with their rationale that they need more space at this season. If that were true, everyone would be asking for the same thing. He is concerned about setting a precedent for that reason. He would lean toward rejecting this application, but as they are a good member of the community and it is a well run store, he would agree to approving it for one year and re-examining it on a yearly basis with the applicant coming forward with a more permanent solution, and second, with a provision that it would be rescinded if it became a Code Compliance problem. 9. Commissioner Tyler stated he concurred with Commissioner Kirk's recommendation for only one year. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated you could not rescind an application within 30-days as there is a statutory limit and process one has to go through to rescind a conditional use permit. Therefore, you would have to approve it subject to the revocation process. Second, staff is recommending a two year approval and any store can request and utilize this section of the Municipal Code. 10. Chairman Robbins stated he concurs with the other Commissioners. A one year approval would allow them time and not require them to remove what is there but, they need to seriously consider remodeling the store. At this time, the approval is only for 45 days, so any issues with Code Compliance are mute. G:\WPDOCS\P(:11-28-OO.wpd 20 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 11. Commissioner Kirk suggested staff keep track of the Code Compliance issues for consideration when this application is re- applied for. 12. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-085 approving Conditional Use Permit 2000-052, as amended. a. Condition #2; approved for one year, or January, 2001. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Abels and Butler. ABSTAIN: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Continued - Master Design Guidelines 2000-01 1 ; a request of Kristy Brady for review of prototype house plans for two different facades located at 51-785 and 51-805 Avenida Villa. 1. Chairman Robbins asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if the pictures submitted were homes that had been built in the Cove. Staff stated yes. 3. Commissioner Kirk asked what decorative detail had been added. Staff identified the areas. 4. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Richard Crockett stated he was available to answer questions. 5. Commissioner Kirk stated this submittal does addresses some of the concerns raised at the last meeting. It is still two homes that will be built next to each other, but he is still concerned about the substance of the submittal. The Master Design Guidelines were created for the purpose of seeing that homes in the Cove have more design detail. GAWPDOCSTC11-28-OO.wpd 21 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 6. Chairman Robbins stated he too is concerned, but believes it is a step in the right direction. This submittal is for two homes on two specific lots. He asked if the builder could build these homes in multiple locations. Staff stated yes, but staff will be making inspection to see that there is variation. 7. Commissioner Tyler stated he concurs with Commissioner Kirk, as it has been upgraded. 8. Commissioner Kirk asked if they could approve the application and then after three or four homes are built, they could come back with more designs. He asked the applicant if he could provide more variations in the future. Mr. Crockett stated he could. 9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Minute Motion 2000-022 approving Master Design Guidelines 2000-01 1 , as submitted. With the requirement for additional design variations for future homes. Unanimously approved. B. Right of Way 2000-002; a request of the City of La Quinta for a General Plan consistency finding for a proposed acquisition of street right-of-way to widen the Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection located at southeast corner of Washington Street/Highway 111 intersection. 1. Chairman Robbins asked for the staff report. Senior Engineer Steve Speer presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked what a consistency finding meant. Staff stated they were required to obtain legislative approval of staff's recommendation. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-086 approving RW-A 2000-002, as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners NOES: None. ABSENT ABSTAIN: None. Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. : Commissioners Abels and Butler. G:\WPD0CS\RC1 1-28-OO.wpd 22 Planning Commission Minutes November 28, 2000 VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the City Council meeting of November 21, 2000. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held December 9, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. on November 28, 2000. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Ouinta, California G:\WPDOCS\PC11-28-OO.wpd 23 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: CHRISTINE DI IORIO, PLANNING MANAGER N VIA: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2000 SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING A: MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT TO TITLE 8, BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION Staff is requesting this item be continued to January 23, 2000, to allow additional time to prepare the report. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2000 CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA) 2000-071 CHANGE OF ZONE (ZC) 2000-096 VILLAGE USE PERMIT (VUP) 2000-040 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) 2000-402 AMEND THE VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINE BOUNDARIES REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; 2) AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING LAND USE DESIGNATION TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL; 3) AMEND THE VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINE BOUNDARIES; AND 4) ALLOW DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A 16,222 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT. LOCATION: 1) NORTHEAST CORNER OF AVENUE 52 AND DESERT CLUB DRIVE, 2) ON THE WEST SIDE OF EISENHOWER DRIVE BETWEEN CALLE TAMPICO TO AVENIDA MONTEZUMA, AND 3) THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF AVENUE 52 AND DESERT CLUB DRIVE. APPLICANTS: ZONING: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, LLC CITY OF LA QUINTA LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) NORTH: VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL SOUTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) EAST: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR) WEST: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC) The currently vacant Chapman project site of 4.99 acres, is located at the northeast corner of Avenue 52 And Desert Club Drive. The site is adjacent and across Avenue 52 from The Tradition Club. The site is currently General Plan designated and zoned Low Density Residential. The City request includes seven parcels located fronting on Eisenhower Drive, south of Calle Tampico. The seven parcels are currently General Plan designated Medium Density Residential and zoned Cove Residential. The applicant is requesting to amend the General Plan and Zoning Designation from Low Density Residential to Village Commercial and allow a restaurant at northeast Corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive. The City is requesting to amend the General Plan and Zoning Designation from Medium Density Residential and Cove Residential to Village Commercial on Eisenhower Drive south of Calle Tampico to bring the into make the appropriate General Plan and Zoning designation recognizing the properties historic use. The City is also requesting to amend the Village Design Guideline Boundaries to include all referenced properties (Attachment 1). 2. Village Use Permit The project: consists of a 16,222 square foot restaurant with outdoor dining and parking lot with 190 spaces on 4.99 acres (Attachment 2). The project will take access from Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive with a circular driveway entrance. A twenty foot landscape setback is provided along Avenue 52, a ten foot landscape setback along the north property line, and an abundance of landscaping at the corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive. Parking lot landscaping absorbs 5.99% of the total parking area. The Zoning Code standard requires 1 parking space for every 75 feet of gross floor area; this project needs 216 spaces to meet that standard. The project provides 190 spaces and the applicant prepared a Parking Study (Attachment 3) to justify a lower parking standard for this project. Variations to any parking standard within the Village Commercial District under 9.65.030. 3.a. can be approved. The Parking Study shows parking usage at five local "upscale" restaurants, parking required for this facility if were built in seven different California cities using their requirements, and consideration of absorbing the 26 spaces using a valet parking overlay strategy. The study recornmends implementing the valet parking strategy and as an alternative modify the parking lot design to accommodate the spaces. Architecture The architecture of the restaurant is reminiscent of an early California or Spanish structure and utilizes russet blend colored two piece mission clay tile roofing, white smooth hand troweled mission plaster walls, tan stackable concrete columns, brown wood sash windows and doors, precast stone veneer below some windows, and brown wood trellis'. The structure is irregular in shape and uses a variety of roof types and heights, with a maximum height of 22 feet at the tower entry to the restaurant facing the southwest. The balance of the structure varies from 16 to 20 feet high. A majority of the windows are shaded by the trellis' or colonnade. A gable tile roof porte' cochere is provided over the passenger drop off and valet area at the entry. A 800 square foot full basement is provided for a wine cellar and private dining near the center of the restaurant. The Landscape Planting Plan provides a pallette of plant material for shrubs, groundcover, and trees. At the access drive off of Desert Club, California Pepper trees provide a canopy entrance Mesquite trees line the perimeter of the project site along Avenue 52 and the north edge of the parking lot; and in planter areas throughout the parking lot. At the corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club and surrounding the building and outdoor dining, shrubs, groundcover, and trees are integrated into a unique landscape golf experience concept. The landscaping concept enhances the building design and includes a putting green, lakes, and pedestrian paths with connecting bridges. Undulating mounding (3-4 foot) is provided in this area to buffer Avenue 52 and Desert Club; the mounding extends along Avenue 52 buffering the east portion of the parking lot. A water efficiency study has been completed and the project is in compliance with the code. Site lighting consists of eighteen 20-foot high square poles, located generally on the Perimeter of the parking lot, with box luminaries with flush lenses directed downward. Poles have one 175 watt metal halide lamps. There is also landscape accent lighting including tree lighting and bollards. The photometric data from the illumination study shows light in the parking area is between one and two foot candles, and a 2.75 ratio of average light to minimum light in compliance with the Zoning Code (Section 9.150.80K). There are two individually mounted halo lit reverse channel letter signs proposed. The copy will read "Palmer's". Both will be located on the tower; one will face Avenue 52 and one will facie Desert Club Drive. The proposed letter size will be 4'-4 and 7/8" high and 2'-7 and 3/4" long for a total of 23.4 square feet. Proposed is one approximately 7' high and 3'6" wide monument sign, located at the corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive, consisting of "Eldorado" stone veneer and aged wood reveals with a Spanish Terra Cotta tile roof to match the building. The total sign square footage will be 18.5 square feet. The letters are reverse channel letters that will back lit. One "Parking" directional monument sign, located at the parking lot entrance on Avenue 52, 2"-27/8 " high and 3' wide for a total of 3.0 square feet. The sign will consist of "Eldorado" stone veneer and aged wood reveals with a Spanish Terra Cotta tile roof to match the building. The "Parking " signature sign using 1,14 " flat cut out letters will be mounted on both faces, this sign will not be illuminated. •T 1, 1• • • , The applicant's request was sent to sent City Departments and affected public agencies on September 25, 2000, requesting comments to be returned by October 11, 2000. All applicable comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. This case wras advertised in the Desert n newspaper and posted on November 6, 2000. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice. Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee unanimously approved the architectural and landscape plans as submitted on November 1, 2000. (Attachment 4, Excerpts from Minutes). ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Based on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, staff prepared Environmental Assessment 2000-402 for the project. Staff recommends certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS• All findings can be made for each application per the Municipal Code. There are no issues with this request and findings required to approve this request can be made as noted in the attached resolutions. 1 . Adopt: Planning Commission Resolution 2000- recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (EA 2000-402 according to the findings set forth in the attached Resolution; and 2. Adopt. Planning Commission Resolution 2000- , recommending to the City Council approval General Plan Amendment (GPA) 2000-071 to change the General Plan Land Use designation from Low Density Residential to Village Commercial at northeast Corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive, amend the General Plan and Zoning Designation from Medium Density Residential to Village Commercial on Eisenhower Drive south of Calle Tampico; and 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000- _,recommending to the City Council approval of a Zone Change 2000-096 to change the Zoning designation from Low Density Residential to Village Commercial at northeast Corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive, amend the General Plan and Zoning Designation from Cove Residential to Village Commercial on Eisenhower Drive south of Calle Tampico; and 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000--,amending Village Design Guideline Boundaries; and 5. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000- , recommending to the City Council approval of Village Use Permit 2000-04 to allow development plans for a 16.222 square foot restaurant with outdoor dining , subject to conditions. Attachments: 1. Site Location Map 2. Plan Exhibits 3. Parking Study 4. Excerpts from the November 1, 2000 minutes of the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee Prepared by: Fred Baker, AICP Principal Planner Submitted by: c4r(_ �4 ' Christine di lorio Planning Manager jLLLLLLLU c+ cc Q W z Z l0 a M u q F( F m ..1 'm ATT/%CHMENT #1 c a� a _m •v a�i E _� omv a _� a � 4) 0co ` N C > 0�> N _�cm a Rt 0 G. =) 0 :' 0. � 0 Q 0 N wa a.oa LU I ■111 Iiilll 11111 ■1111 1111111111� 11 111111111 11111 111111 A-FTACHMENT #4 Architectural &. Landscape Review Committee Minutes November I, 2000 �i. a islands to allow the roots to grow. Staff asked if the use of the annual color wi e e as the Palm Desert store with the "W". Mr. Doczi stated no, y wiill not be used. / 9. Committee Member Reynolds thanked the appl ant on his presentation. He has no problems with the prop al. 10. Committee Member Cunningham stated he ould like to be sure the line -of -site is correct. Mr. Cross state is a concern of theirs as well, and they will make sure it works 11. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if he building is constructed and the equipment is seen, is there condition to see that it is not visible. Planning Manager Christi a di lorio stated yes, a condition will be added. Mr. Cross aske if they would be able to add the extra two feet if they find i s needed. Staff stated it could be added to the Specific Plan s an option if there is a problem with the visibility at the time construction. 12. There being no furth discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Memb r Bobbitt/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion 2000-020 reco/Fhmending approval of the landscaping plant pallette and b ilding elevations for Specific Plan 2000-045 and Site Develo ent Permit 2000-677, as amended. a. C ndition #1: Deleted b. ondition #3c: Deleted. c. New condition: Requiring the mechanical equipment to be hidden from sight. —� B. General Plan Amendment 2000-071 Zone Change 2000-096 Village Use Permit 2000-004 and Environmental Assessment 2000-402; a request of Chapman Golf Development, LLC for review of building elevations and landscaping plans for an 11,900 square foot restaurant to be located on the northeast corner of 52nd Avenue and Desert Club Drive. 1. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. G:\wi'Docs\A> KCt-t-oo.wpd 4 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes November 1, 2000 2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff to identify what the grass area was to be used for. Staff stated it was for special theme functions. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated it is a great project and he would love to see more of this type. 4. Committee Members Bobbitt and Reynolds stated they had no problems with the project. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2000-021 recommending approval of building elevations and landscaping plans for General Plan Amendment 2000-071, Zone Change 2000-096, Village Use Permit 2000-004, and Environmental Assessment 2000-402 2000-045. Unanimously approved. Site Development Permit 2000-68 ; a request of Tait and Associates for review of building elevations and landscaping plans for a 3,984 square t convenience store located on the northwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 an ashington Street within Point Happy Specific Plan. 1. Pri CI ipal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in th staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Develop ent Department. 2. Committee ber Cunningham asked about the location of the building. PlannihqManager Christine di lorio stated it is right off the Highway 111 Ngnal entrance. Staff has worked with the developer of the site be consistent with the other buildings in the project. 3. Mr. Steve Frank, Tait and ssociates, stated they have been working with staff to reach an greement on the canopy design. 4. Committee Member Cunningham ated this is an extremely sensitive site. The Cliffhouse Restaur t is located on the other side of the rock, which is gorgeous. a restaurant design is almost what they are looking for on the te. What needs to happen is for the architect to go over and loo at the Cliffhouse and come real close to it architecturally. This 1s a ice looking gas G:\WPDOCS\ALR.CJ 1-1-OO.wpd 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-071, CHANGE OF ZONE 2000- 096, VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04, AND VILLAGE AT LA QUINTA DESIGN GUIDELINES AMENDED BOUNDARIES CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2000-402 APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28th day of November, 2000 and continued said Public Hearing to the 121h day of December, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2000-402 for General Plan Amendment 2000-071, Change of Zone 2000-096, and Village Use Permit 2000-04 herein referred to as the "Project' for Chapman Golf Development, L. L.C.; and, WHEREAS, said Project has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"(as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2000-402) to evaluate the potential for adverse environmental impacts; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said Project could have a significant adverse effect on the environment unless mitigation measures are implemented, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact could be filed; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly, in that appropriate mitigation measures have been imposed which will minimize project impacts. 2. The proposed Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of PC RESO EA 2000-402.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Environmental Assessment 2000-402 December 12, 2000 California history or prehistory. 3. Considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 4. The proposed Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals as no significant effects on environmental factors by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed Project will not have environmental effects directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 6. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect setforth in 14 CAL Code Regulations §753.5(d). 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record, including EA 2000-402 and the comments received thereon, that the project will have a significant impact upon the environment. 8. EA 2000-402 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis. 9. The location and custodian of the record of proceedings relating to this project is the Community Development Department of the City of La Quinta, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 922253. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2000-402 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, on file in the Community Development Department. PC RESO EA 2000-402.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Environmental Assessment 2000-402 December 12, 2000 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 12th day of December, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PC RESO EA 2000-402.wpd Environmental Checklist Form 1 . Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2000-071, Change of Zone 2000-096, Village Use Permit 2000-04 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Fred Baker, 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: North side of Avenue 52, east of Desert Club Dr. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Chapman Golf Development 78-505 Old Avenue 52 La Quinta, CA 92253 6. General Plan Designation: Current: Low Density Residential Proposed: Village Commercial 7. Zoning: Current: Low Density Residential Proposed: Village Commercial 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.) Village Use Permit to allow the construction of an 16,222 square foot restaurant, outside patio dining and associated parking and landscaping on 4.99 acres. Since the land is currently designated Low Density Residential, a General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone are also required. The General Plan and Zoning map amendments include non-contiguous lands adjacent to existing Village Commercial designations, located on Eisenhower Drive. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: Currently vacant, designated for Village Commercial South: Existing single family residential and golf course East: Medium Density Residential north of Avenue 52; Low Density Residential south of Avenue 52 West: Currently vacant, designated for Village Commercial 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) 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 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Agriculture Resources Hydrology and Water Quality Air Quality Land Use Planning Biological Resources Mineral Resources Cultural Resources Noise Geology and Soils Population and Housing Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems LJ Mandatory Findings I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑E I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 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. 0 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. S�,}a,���r�eDate /}-� 5�711L1 L' 1 ILA t 14— LAi �i�- P t dN For rm a ame, P:TEQAchecklistEA 00-402.wpd Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact' answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact' answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Neeative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact' to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The analysis of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance P:\CEQAchecklistEA 00-402.wpd Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan Exhibit CIR-5) b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (General Plan EIR, page 5-12 ff.) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Dept. Of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to on -agricultural use? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29, 5-32) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Aerial photographs) III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (General Plan EIR) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Application materials) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X X X im f:l X X M EI IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan EIR p. 4.69) b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan EIR p. 4.65 ff.) c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (General Plan EIR p. 4,65 ff.) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? (General Plan EIR p. 4.65 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (General Plan EIR p. 4.65 ff.) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5) V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic resources? (General Plan EIR, page 4-77 ff.) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best available example of its type, or is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-77 ff.) c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (Lakebed boundary map, City of La Quinta) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (General Plan EIR, page 4-77 ff.) VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: X X X X X X i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan FIR, Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) X ON i7 EI 17 iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) iv) Landslides? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan, page 8-7) c) Be located on. a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on - or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 IT) e)Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-32) VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application Materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application Materials) c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application Materials) d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a projecl: located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-11) h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Vill. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Master Environmental X Assessment 6-26, 6-27) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (Preliminary Hydrology Report, The Keith Companies, October, 2000) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (Preliminary Hydrology Report, The Keith Companies, October, 2000) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (Preliminary Hydrology Report, The Keith Companies, October, 2000) f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13) g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13) IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Application Materials) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local costal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Master Environmental Assessment 2-11) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5) X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: X X X X X X X X X a) Result in the: loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (General Plan FIR, page 4-157 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? (General Plan EIR, page 4-157 ff) c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan EIR, page 4-157 ff) X X M X X d) For a project 'located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Master Environmental Assessment) e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive levels? (General Plan map) XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, page 2-14) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) XII1. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Police protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9 ff. ) Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 ff. ) XIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application Materials) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials) XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (General Plan FIR, page 4-126 ff.) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (_Application materials) X X X X X X X X X X X X X im II e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials) I I I I X c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. See attached Addendum. SOURCES: Master Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 1992. SCAQMD CEQA Handbook. General Plan, City of La Quinta, 1992. General Plan Environmental Impact Report, 1992 Paleontological Lakebed Delineation Map, City of La Quinta. City of La Quinta Municipal Code f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials) g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ff.) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ff.) d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ff.) e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ff.) f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?(General Plan MEA, page 4-28) XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVIII EARLIER ANALYSES. 04 li K X X M M 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. No earlier analyses specific to this project site have been used. X M X 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. Addendum to Environmental Checklist, EA 2000-402 I.a)&c) Avenue 52 is designated a secondary image corridor in the General Plan. This designation requires that particular attention be placed on parkway landscaping for the proposed project. The project has a low intensity o use, however, and provides more landscaping along Avenue 52 than would be typical. This will reduce the potential impacts to scenic vistas to a less than significant level. L d) The project site is currently vacant desert land. The project proponent will be required to comply with the City's lighting standards. In addition, the bulk of the lighting will occur in the parking lot area, which is bordered to the north by commercial lands in the Village Commercial designation. No sensitive receptors are located adjacent to the proposed project. The site's lighting impacts are not expected to be significant. III. c), d) & e) Based on the restaurant land use proposed, the project can be expected to generate approximately 1,459 trips per day'. Based on this, as shown in the Table! below, the project will not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds. CO 45 mph 28.7 3 Daily Threshold 550 Running Exhaust Emissions (pounds/day) PM10 PM10 PM10 ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes 1.29 5.15 0.0 0.13 75 100 150 Tires 0.13 Based on 1,459 trips/day and average trip length of 4.0 miles, using EIVIFAC7G Model provided by California Air Resources Board. Assumes catalytic light autos at 75°F. * Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance in determining the significance of a project. The Coachella Valley has in the past been a non -attainment area for PM10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or smaller). Recent analysis by SCAQMD has determined that the Valley has reached attainment, and a redesignation is pending. In order to control PM10, the City has imposed standards and requirements on development to control dust. SCAQMD also suggests mitigation for vehicular emissions, which are integrated into the following mitigation measures: Institute of Traffic Engineers, Trips Generation Handbook, 6th Edition for quality restaurant P:\FRED\EA-Addern-Chaoman.WPD No earth moving activity shall be undertaken without the review and approval of a PM10 Management Plan by the City Engineer. 2. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 3. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on -site power generation. 4. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 5. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site. 6. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 7. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 8. All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion until the site is constructed upon. 9. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. 10. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site. 11. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. 12. All buildings on the project site shall conform to energy use guidelines in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality from the proposed project will not be significant. Moreover, improvements in technology which are likely to reduce impacts, particularly from motor vehicles or transit route improvements in the future which may occur at the project site are not included in the analysis. P:\FRED\EA-Addem-Chapman.WPD IV. a), d), e) The site has been impacted by development activity and is not located within fluvial deposit areas. Therefore, although shown in the General Plan EIR as being within the habitat range of the California ditaxis, its occurrence is not expected on the project site. As disturbed and isolated habitat, the project site is not expected to currently provide a high quality environment for any significant specifies. V. a), b) & d) As previously stated, the project site has been significantly impacted. Previous development and improvement of Avenue 52 and surrounding lands have caused significant disturbance. Recorded archaeological sites, however, have been recorded within one mile of the project site, including human cremation sites and artifact deposits. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1 . An archaeological monitor shall be on site during all clearing, grubbing and trenching of the project site. If any archaeological resources are observed all work activity shall cease in the area of the observation, until such time as the monitor can determine appropriate actions to be taken, and develop a mitigation plan for such find. V1..a) i) The proposed project does not lie in an Alquist-Priolo hazard area. The potential impact for fault rupture is not expected to be significant. VI. a) ii) The proposed project occurs in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The City has adopted the provisions of the Uniform Building Code for this hazard. Construction of any structure on the project site will conform to these standards, and will reduce the potential hazard to a less than significant level. VI. b) & c) The site is not located in a blowsand hazard area, but is composed of Myoma fine sand, which can be unstable if not properly compacted prior to construction. The City's standards for site preparation shall be adhered to in all site preparation activities. In order to reduce the impacts of unstable soils on the proposed site, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any structure on the proposed site, the applicant shall submit, for review and approval by the City Engineer, a detailed, site specific soil study, which shall include recommendations designed for the specific structures being constructed. P:\FRED\EA-Addem-Chaprnan.WPD VIII. a) The proposed project will be required to retain the 100 year, 24 hour storm on - site. The water will be retained in retention basins which shall be designed to meet the standards established by the City Engineer. This requirement includes the installation of "water cleaning" devices when necessary to ensure that no contaminants are introduced into the storm water system. This requirement will reduce the potential for violation of a water quality standard to a less than significant level. VIII. b) Domestic water is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District, which extracts groundwater from a number of wells in the Lower Thermal sub -basin. The District will require the installation of water conserving landscaping, as well as the adherence to building code requirements for water conserving fixtures within the homes. This will reduce the potential impacts associated with the proposed project to a less than significant level. VIII. c), d) & e) Any development proposal reduces the amount of natural terrain available for percolation, and changes drainage patterns. Construction of structures and parking areas will reduce the amount of land available for absorption of water into the ground, and has the potential to increase surface runoff. The proposed project will direct surface runoff to retention basins located within the project. The City Engineer will impose conditions of approval to ensure that any drainage is properly treated, if needed. No significant impact is expected. VIII. f) The proposed project is located in a Zone AO flood zone, in an area subject to flooding in a 100 year storm. However, as a commercial structure, the project will not place residences in such a flood zone. The City Engineer will condition the proposed project to ensure that the building is safe from flooding as part of the building permit process. No significant impact is expected. IX. b) The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone from Low Density Residential to Village Commercial. This represents a significant change in the proposed land use for the project site. The site is surrounded on the north and west by commercially designated lands, on the south by an arterial roadway, and on the east by Medium and Low Density Residential lands. The isolated nature of the parcel, as well as its adjacency to commercially designated lands, reduces the potential impacts of the General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone to a less than significant level. The change to the Village Commercial designation in this area is a logical extension of the designation. P:\FRED\EA-Addem-Chapman.WPD The General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone also include a parcel of land located on the west side of Eisenhower Drive, south of Calle Tampico. A series of lots, currently designated Medium Density Residential, are proposed for Village Commercial. The proposed amendments include the modification of the district boundary and design guidelines boundary, respectively. The intersection of Calle Tampico and Eisenhower, which both currently carry considerable traffic, is the gateway to the Village area. Traffic on Eisenhower is expected to continue to increase, and make residential development more and more incompatible. The potential impacts of the General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone on this area, therefore, are also not expected to be significant. XI. a), b) & c) The ,proposed project site is isolated, but does occur adjacent to residential development. Although noise contours at the project site from vehicular traffic are not expected to exceed those acceptable for commercial development, the residential lands to the east could be impacted by construction noise. In order to lower the potential impacts associated with construction on the project site, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1 . All construction equipment shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers' standards. 2. All stationary construction equipment shall be placed so that noise is directed away from the eastern side of the property. 3. Construction staging areas shall be located along the western property line. 4. All construction shall occur during the hours allowed in the La Quinta Municipal Code. XIII. a) The construction of the proposed project will result in short-term potential impacts for all public services. The property, once developed, will generate property tax. These taxes will contribute to the City's General Fund, and off -set the potential impact to public services. All development has an impact on governmental facilities and services. The project proponent will be required to participate in the City's Impact Fee Program, which helps to offset roadway improvements. The proposed project will be required to pay school fees in effect at the time of development to mitigate for the impacts to schools. The proposed project is not expected to have a significant impact on services or facilities. XV. a) The proposed project was analysed as a Low Density Residential development in the General Plan. A 4.99 acre area could generate up to 25 residential units, which would result in approximately 250 daily trips. As previously stated, the P:\FRED\EA-Addem-Chapman.WPD proposed project will generate approximately 1,459 daily trips. The increase in traffic however, is occurring on a street which is expected to display acceptable levels of service at buildout in the area of the proposed project (17,000 ADT, with a capacity for up to 28,000 ADT). The increase in traffic caused by the proposed project is therefore not expected to be significant. XVI. b), d) & f) All development impacts utilities and service systems. The proposed project, however, will be required to meet the standards of the City and service providers in constructing facilities which are energy efficient and water conserving. The construction of the proposed project will have a limited impact on solid waste disposal. However, the restaurant operator will be required to participate in the City's AB 939 programs, which are designed to reduce the impacts to landfills. The overall impacts of the project on these services is not expected to be significant. P:\FRED\EA-Adcem-Chapman.WPD PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA. RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM GOLF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC) TO ON APPROXIMATELY 4.99 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF AVENUE 52 AND DESERT CLUB DRIVE AND SEVEN PARCELS LOCATED ON EISENHOWER DRIVE, SOUTH OF CALLE TAMPICO CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-071 APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28`h day of November, 2000 and continued said Public Hearing to the 12`h day of December, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and to consider the request of Chapman Golf Development, L. L.C. for a General Plan Amendment as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: 770-190-001, 770-181-002, 770-181-003, 770-181-004, 773-065-012, 773-065-13, 773-065-025, 773-065-024, 773-065-022, 773-065-021, AND 773-065-020 and; WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify a recommendation for approvall of said General Plan Amendment: 1. The new land use designation is suitable and appropriate for the property involved because it is an extension of the existing Village Commercial District. 2. The new land use designation is compatible with the similar designations within the City because the property is accessible from an arterial street . 3. The proposed Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land use does not exceed the height limitations, the floor area ratio standard for commercial zones. 4. That the General Plan Amendment is within an area that will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the A:\PC RESO GPA 2000-071.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- General Plan Amendment 2000-071 December 12, 2000 City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described General Plan Amendment request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 121h day of December, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Steve Robbins, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\PC RESO GPA 2000-071.wpd �•-I■�■■■ .... ... -► M■■�■� mill ■� � aataaaaaaa , ' illlllllllll � - . 111111■11 111111111111 - ' 111111111■1 -, - ■ ICI=CIIIIIII . 111111I t 111111111111 ■� NEW 111111111111 a�la NINE 1 ■�iill■i■ ■��niinu ll�iiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiriii �iiiii iiliil°iiiii ■°iiuiii -also �111� 11 1111/1111 1111 1111111 .III :11■11� 11111■11111 111111111111 . � 111 ■ III� ■ 1111/1111 111■1111111 Is II■ IlClllllllll 11■11111111 � � _•�••• 1■CCCC:CCC �CCCC■ CCC ZMEllZ.-ij III Hi l CC 111111111 � CCC1111111 EXHIBIT A PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM LOW DENSITY TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC) ON APPROXIMATELY 4.99 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF AVENUE 52 AND DESERT CLUB DRIVE AND SEVEN PARCELS LOCATED ON EISENHOWER DRIVE, SOUTH OF CALLE TAMPICO CASE NO.: CHANGE OF ZONE 2000- 096 APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28h day of November, 2000 and continued said Public Hearing to the 12`h day of December, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and to consider the request of Chapman Golf Development, L. L.C. for a Change of Zone as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: 770-190-001, 770-181-002, 770-181-003, 770-181-004, 773-065-012, 773-065-13, 773-065-025, 773-065-024, 773-065-022, 773-065-021, AND 773-065-020 and; WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Zone Change. 1. This Zone Change is consistent the General Plan being amended, in that the zone change category proposed are consistent with the with those goals, objectives, and policies in the General Plan. 2. The Zoning Change is suitable and appropriate for the property involved because it is an extension of the existing Village Commercial District. 3. The new land use designation is compatible with the similar designations within the City because the property is accessible from an arterial street . 4. This Zone Change will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses will require Planning Commission review and approval of development plans, which will ensure adequate conditions of approval. AAPC RESO ZC 2000-096.wpd Planning Commiission Resolution 2000- Change of Zone 2000-096 December 12, 2000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described Zone Change request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 12" day of December, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Steve Robbins, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\PC RESO ZC: 2000-096.wpd on OEM mill mill SENSE MEN ■■% �� 1� ���i►r ■MEMO■ • � 111111111111 ■ 111111�11 111111111111 111111111■1 ., - • � 111111111111 � ' � ���r 111111111111 - pp pp � 111111111111 ��� i 111111111111� I NE�11 ■`` ■11■■ ■ I11111111 11111 111111 ■oil 111■ ■1�11111111 11 ■1111111 ele11C111111 gl■II, 1 ®.111111 11 111111111 'gill 1■111 gill. \IIIII 11 111111111 .. 111111 -oill •;.11ig 11 111111111 lull 111111 Mill : ■Ilg 11 11■11111 11111 111111 Mill■ Jf glll� ■ 111111111 111■1111111 M 11 Ell■ 11 111111111II II ON II III i�iliiiii■ ii iiiiiiiii iliii MINI EXHIBIT A PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE BOUNDARIES FOR THE VILLAGE AT LA QUINTA DESIGN GUIDELINES VILLAGE AT LA QUINTA DESIGN GUIDELINES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 28`h day of November, 2000 and continued said Public Hearing to the 12`h day of December, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider a recommendation to amend the boundaries of The Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines as depicted in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2000-402); and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said Guidelines will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify amending the boundaries of said Guidelines: 1 . The Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines amended boundaries are consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan being amended, as they incorporate the General Plan land use and design concepts as stated therein. 2. The Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines amended boundaries will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, as The Village area, under the Guidelines, will not be developed in any manner inconsistent with the General Plan and other current City standards. A:\PC RESO VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINES.wpd Resolution 2000- Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines, Amended Boundaries December 12, 2000 3. Properties within the amended boundaries of Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines are subject to the guidelines contained within. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described request Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines, Amended Boundaries for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 121h day of December, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Steve Robbins, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\PC RESO VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINES.wpd 70 WIT, cm . ,:. .. C O LL L fl m m ca Fj V V se nwia api n • �L1111 ` EEO a. 0m 1 J 0 H� �I J L I _ . = anup JaM yu !1777-r--T-T-r--� I I r EXHIBIT A PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A VILLAGE USE PERMIT FOR THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS OF A 16,222 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT FACILITY ON 4.99 ACRES CASE NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 281h day of November, 2000 and continued said Public Hearing to the 12`" day of Decernber, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and to consider the request of Chapman Golf Development, L. L.C. for a Village Use Permit as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: APN'S: 770-190-001, 770-181-002, 770-181-003, 770-1 81-004 WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, at its meeting of November 1� , 2000, did review the architecture and landscape plans for the proposed project and recommended 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 Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify said Village Use Permit 2000-04: A. Village Use Permit 2000-04 is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan proposed General Plan Amendments are consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan in that the proposals meet General Plan Policy 2-5.1 .1 and 2-5.1 .3 which state: Policy 2-5.1.1 The VC category shall provide for the development of the Village area as the center of a year-round commercial, residential, recreational and community government center. The VC category shall allow specialty commercial, eating and drinking establishments, professional offices and neighborhood commercial uses, all located in a unique pedestrian - oriented atmosphere; and, A:\PC RESO VUP 2000-04.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Village Use Permit 2000-04 December 12, 2000 Policy 2-5 1 3 The City shall place a priority on facilitating the development of the Village within the context of real estate market opportunities and constraints. B. The design and development of the facility will be consistent with the City's Zoning Code provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with the General Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences pursuant to Environmental Assessment 2000-402. C. The site design of the proposed project is compatible with the development quality in the area and accommodates site generated traffic. D. The landscape design of the proposed project complements the building and surrounding development in that it enhances the aesthetic and visual quality of the area, provides adequate visual buffering with trees and mounding, and uses a high quality of plant materials. E. The architectural design of the project is compatible with the surrounding development in that is a similar scale, massing and building height of other development in the area; the building materials will be high quality, durable and low maintenance, provided conditions are met. F. The architectural design of the project is consistent with the Village Design Guidelines in that land use and circulation considerations, scale, massing and building height the facility , and other provisions the Guidelines criteria are met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does approve Village Use Permit 2000-04 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this the 12th day of December, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: A:\PC RESO VUP 2000-04.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Village Use Permit 2000-04 December 12, 2000 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Steve Robbins, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Q,uinta, California A:\PC RESO VUP 2000-04.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. DECEMBER 12, 2000 GENERAL 1 . Upon conditional approval by the City Council of this development application, the City Clerk shall prepare and record, with the Riverside County Recorder, a memorandum noting that conditions of approval for development of the property exist and are available for review at City Hall. 2. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. Prior to the, issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant :shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. 4. Permits 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 permits. A:\VUP 00-04-COA.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 PROPERTY RIGFis,S 5. Prior to issuance of a permit, the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights required of this approval or otherwise necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 7. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) AVENUE 52 (Primary Arterial): No additional dedication required. 2) DESERT CLUB DRIVE (Local): Additional 5-feet of dedication (for a 30-foot half -street). Dedication will be based on a 450-foot centerline radius. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Commercial: Minimum 24-foot width, with on -street parking prohibited. S. Right of way geometry for knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 9. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 10. If the City Engineer determines that access rights to proposed street rights of way shown on the site plan are necessary prior to dedication of the rights of way, the applicant shall grant the necessary rights of way within 60 days of written request by the City. 11. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to five feet with the express concurrence of IID. A:\VUP 00-04-COA.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 12. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved): A. Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial): 20-feet B. Desert Club Drive (Local): None required. The setback requirement applies to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes. 13. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 14. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and properties from all frontage along the streets and properties except access points shown on the approved site plan. 15. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 16. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners 17. The applicant shall file a Parcel Merger to incorporate all of the properties (Lot 90 of Tract 28470-1; APN 770-181-002; APN 770-181-003; and APN 770-181-004) into a single parcel. IMPROVEMEN"f PLAN As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. A:\VUP 00-04-COA.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 18. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 19. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 20. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as - constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 21. Depending on the timing of development of the lots or parcels within this site and the status of off -site improvements at that time, the subdivider may be required to construct improvements, to construct additional improvements subject to reimbursement by others, to reimburse others who construct improvements that are obligations of this permit approval, to secure the cost of the improvements for future construction by others, or a combination of these methods. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the City, the Applicant shall, at the time of approval of a development or building permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements. A:\VUP 00-04-COA.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 22. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to the issuance of any construction permits. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 23. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, development -wide improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 24. If improvements are phased with administrative approvals (e.g., Site Development Permits), off -site improvements and common improvements (e.g., retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first phase unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase and subsequent phases unless a construction phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer. 25. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan or in an improvement agreement, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 26. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations)• If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal A:\VUP 00-04-COA.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been met. 27. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist. 28. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 29. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within the site, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. The limits given in this condition and the previous condition are not entitlements and more restrictive limits may be imposed in the permit approval or plan checking process. If compliance with the limits is impractical, however, the City will consider alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring - owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 30. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 31. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 32. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. A:\VUPOO-04-COA.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 33. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 34. Stormwaiter shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual -lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2'/2 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is impracticable. If individual -lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet the individual -lot retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC. 35. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route. 36. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site or passed through to the overflow outlet. 37. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data which shall be submitted for checking with the retention facility plans. The design percolation rate shall l not exceed two inches per hour. 38. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. Maximum retention depth shall be six feet for common basins and two feet for individual -lot retention. 39. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leachfield approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leachfield shall be designed to contain surges of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. (of landscape area) and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 40. In developments for which security will be provided by public safety entities (e.g., the La Quinta Safety Department or the Riverside County Sheriff's Department), retention basins shall be visible from adjacent street(s). No fence or wall shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 41. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which A:\VUP 00-04-COA.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this project excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. 42. The site shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water from any on - site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. UTILITIES 43. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 44. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 45. 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 ireports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 46. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 11 Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial) - Construct 6-foot sidewalk. 2) Desert Club Drive (Local Street) - Improvements (including 5-foot sidewalk) will be constructed by the City under Phase VI Improvement District. A:\VUP 00-04-COA.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 B. PRIVATE STREETS 11 Residential: 24-foot travel width with on -street parking prohibited. The applicant is responsible for the installation of all driveway depressions, approaches, and sidewalk modifications required for compliance with applicable ADA standards. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the City Engineer. 47. 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. 48. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks)• 49. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. 50. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 51. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations which convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust and residue for street sweeping. If a wedge or rolled curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be vertical (1/8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1' in height. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. 52. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): A:\VUP 00-04-COA.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" 53. 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. 54. The City will conduct final inspections of 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. 55. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Private onsite streets at Avenue 52 shall be limited to right turn movements only (both from Avenue 52 and onto Avenue 52). B. Private onsite street at Desert Club Drive shall allow full turn movements. LANDSCAPING 56. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 57. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 58. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or A:\VUP 00-04-00A.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. 59. A 6-foot sidewalk shall be constructed along Avenue 52. The sidewalk shall meander within the 32-foot Right -of -Way and setback. QUALITY ASSURANCE 60. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 61. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 62. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans, specifications and applicable regulations. 63. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be 6early marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 64. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on - site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. The applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly released from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency. FEES AND DEPOSITS 65. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. FIRE MARSHAL 66. Show or provide there exists an infrastructure system capable of providing 2500 GPM with an actual fire flow of 1500 GPM available from any hydrant. This fire flow is A:AVUP 00-04-00A.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-04 based on type VN construction with a fire sprinkler system. 67. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super fire hydrant (6" x 4" x 2-1/2" x 2-1 /2") located not less than 25-feet, or more than 165-feet, from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travel ways. 68. Blue retro-reflective pavement markets shall be mounted on private streets, public streets and driveways to indicate location of fire hydrants. Prior to installation, placement of markers must be approved by the Riverside County Fire Department. 69. The infrastructure including water for fire flow must be installed and available before placing any combustibles on site. 70. All buildings must be accessible by an approved all weather surface to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the building. The unobstructed driveway and road width shall not be less than 20 feet. The vertical clearance shall not be less than 13 feet 6 inches. 71. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant/developer shall furnish one blue line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans must be signed by a registered Civil Engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department'. 72. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, submit two sets of complete building plans to the Fire Department for review. 73. Prior to Building Final, submit sprinkler and alarm plans as required by the Fire Department. 74. Prior to Building Final, install a Knox Security Rapid entry System key box. Contact Fire Department for an application and mounting detail. A:\VUP 00-04-C'OA.wpd PH #C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF. REPORT DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-686 APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES ARCHITECT: BENJAMIN AGUILAR AND ASSOCIATES REQUEST: REVIEW OF TEN SINGLE FAMILY PROTOTYPE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR A SUBDIVISION OF 206 HOMES LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF JEFFERSON STREET, BETWEEN FRED WARING DRIVE AND MILES AVENUE BACKGROUND: The property is located at the northeast corner of the City on 63.1 acres bounded on the east by Jefferson Street, the north by Fred Waring Drive, the south by Miles Avenue, and the west by the Cactus and Wildflower subdivisions (Attachment 1). The project site excludes a 551.7' by 789.48' ten acre area on the corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. The tentative tract map creating the lots for these residences is presently being processed and is scheduled for City Council review on December 19, 2000. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing ten different floor plans, varying from 1,500 to 3,015 square feet of living area, excluding the garages (Attachment 2). The plans are "Spanish-Mediterrean" in nature and utilize 'S' or flat concrete tile roofing, metal sectional garage doors, plastered walls and wood or plastered trim. The roof colors vary from flashed grey, and shades of brown and red. The plaster colors range from beige to light tan, with trim (doors, window frames, fascia, etc.) varying from beige to grey -blue. Nine of the plans are one story high with the height varying from approximately 14 to 16.5 feet. The last plan is a partial two story plan (Classic Plan 5L) of approximately 20.25 feet high. P:\STAN\sdp 2.000-686 alrc rpt.wpd The breakdown of the prototype plans is as follows: HERITAGE SERIES Plan # Livina area # of facades # of bedrooms aaraaes height 2 1,800 sq. ft 3 3 2 car one story 14' 8" 3 2,215 sq. ft. 3 3 3 car one story 16' 3F 2,204 sq. ft. 3 3 + 1 opt 3 + 1 opt one story 14' 4 2,400+250 3 3 + 1 opt 3 car one story 15, 9" 5 3,015 sq. ft. 2 4 3 car one story 16' 4" CLASSIC SERIES Plan # Livina area # of facades # of bedrooms garages height 2 1,500 sq. ft. 3 3 2 car one story 14' 6" 2spl 1,500 sq. ft. 2 3 2 car one story 15' 4" 3 1,725 sq. ft. 3 3 2 car one story 15' 5 1,745 sq. ft. 3 2+ 1 opt 3 or 2 w/opt 1 story 16' 6" 5L 1,745 sq. ft. 2 3+ 1 opt 3 or 2 w/opt 1 story w/loft 20' 4" Seven of the plans provide three facades each with the other three having two each. Rear elevations will be the same regardless of the facade, with sides only varying due to the use of different roof types. The plans use a variety of architectural features including plastered window and door surrounds, recessed windows divided windowpanes on the elevations facing the streets, wainscot treatment, towers, decorative vent treatments, etc. Eight of the ten plans have front loaded garages. Plan 2 of the "Heritage" series has a side entry two car garage and Plan 5 of the "Heritage" series has a side entry for a one car garage. The other two car garage for this plan is front facing. The five "Heritage" plans all use a main single height side facing gable roof. Various towers, hip and other gable roofs extend out from the front of the units. The five "Classic" plans also use a main gable roof, but vary the heights due to varying roof planes. P:\STAN\sdp 2000-686 alrc rpt.wpd Front yard landscaping plans have not yet been submitted. These plans are presently being prepared by a landscape architect. ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE REVIEW: The Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee reviewed this request at its meeting of December 6, 2000, and recommended approval subject to Conditions (Attachment 3). FINDINGS: Compliance with the required Findings for tract development can be made with revisions as follows: 1 . The project is consistent with the General Plan. RESPONSE: The project site is designated for low density residential development which is being proposed. Approval of the tentative tract map for the lots for this project is in compliance with applicable General Plan provisions. 2. The project is consistent with the Zoning Code. RESPONSE: The project is designed to comply with the Zoning Code development standards such as setbacks, building heights, living area, lot coverage, etc. Plan 5L of the "Classic" series shows an optional bedroom in the third car garage space, which increases the number of bedrooms to four. This is not permitted because the four bedroom plan requires a three car garage. Condition of Approval #3 deletes this option. 3. The project is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code. RESPONSE: The Zoning Code design guidelines for tract development require a minimum of two different front elevations, varied roof heights, and window and door surrounds for flat elevation planes. The proposed "Classic" units comply with these requirements in that two or three facades per plan are proposed, roof heights are varied with the combination of different roofs, and plaster surrounds are provided. As noted in Condition #4, on Plan 5 of the "Heritage" series plaster surrounds are required by the design guidelines on the side elevations because those walls are flat. The five "Heritage" plans elevations propose a single height side facing gable roof. The design guidelines require that no more than one of each prototype plan have a continuous plane roof ridge facing the front or rear. Therefore, modifications to the roof are required as noted in Condition #5. P:\STAN\sdp 2000-686 alrc rpt.wpd 4. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. RESPONSE: The architectural styles, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements of the units are attractive and compatible with surrounding development to the west and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. Per the City Zoning Code requiements, the two story loft plan cannot be constructed along the west boundary of the tract. 5. Project landscaping, including but not limited to the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials has been designed so as to provide relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between adjacent land uses and between development and open space, provide an overall unifying influence, enhance the visual continuity of the project, and complement the surrounding project area, ensuring lower maintenance and water use. RESPONSE: The landscaping plans have not yet been submitted and are required in Condition #6 to submit them for Architecture and Landscaping Review Commission (ALRC) approval prior to issuance of first building permit for a production unit. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2000- , approving Site Development Permit 2000-686, subject to the attached conditions: Attachments: 1 . Location Map 2. Plan exhibits (1 1 "x14") 3. ALRC minutes for the meeting of December 6, 2000 Prepared by: Submitted by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner Litt Christine di lorio, Pla ring Manager P:\STAN\sdp 2000-686 alrc rpt.wpd Minute Motion 2000- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2000-686 December 12, 2000 1. Detailed front yard landscaping plans perimeter, and common areas shall be submitted for review and approval by the Architecture and Landscaping Review Commission (ALRC) and Community Development Department for approval prior to issuance of any building permit for the first production unit authorized by this approval. Calculations showing compliance with the City Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance shall be submitted with the preliminary plans. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this approval, final working drawings for five "Heritage" series and five "Classic" series prototype plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. 3. The bedroom option in the garage for Plan 5L of the "Classic" series shall be deleted. 4. On Plan 5 of the "Heritage" series plaster surrounds shall be provided on the side elevations windows and doors of the building that are larger than 2' by 2', subject to Community Development Department approval. 5. The "Heritage" series plans shall be revised so that no more than one of each prototype plan have a continuous plane roof ridge facing the front or rear of the lot, subject to Community Development Department approval. 6. The landscaping and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner and Coachella Valley Water District with verification of approval submitted to the Community Development Department. p:\stan\sdp 2000-686 pc coa.wpd ATTACHMENT #1 f� BBFtMVDA 1007 cr OJFRED WAKING MILES AVE. 2 50TH. AVENUE yP VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE CASE MAP CASE No. SDP 2000-686 CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES s I TE I.NDIO ORTH SCALE: NTS ATTACHMENT 3 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA December 6, 2000 CALL TO ORDER 10:00 a.m. A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Committee was called to order at 10:06 a.m. by Planning Manager Christine di lorio who led the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Bill BobKbitt, Dennis Cunningham, and Frank Reynolds. C. Staff present: Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Management Analyst Britt Wilson, Principal Planner Stan Sawa and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAM A. Planning Manager Christine di lorio asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of November 1, 2000. There being no corrections, it was moved and set%nded by Committee Members Reynolds/Cunningham to approve the minutes as submitted. V. BUSINESS ITEMS': A. Site Development Permit 2000-686; a request of Century -Crowell Communities for review of ten single family prototype architectural plans for a subdivision of 206 homes on the west side of Jefferson Street between Fred Waring Drive and Miles Avenue. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Dennis Cunningham asked if the applicant would like to address the Committee. Ms. Marty Butler, representing Century -Crowell Communities, explained how her G:AW PDOCSVALRC 12-6-OO.wpd 1 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes December 6, 2000 project would blend in with the adjacent and surrounding tracts with the use of wrought iron and split face block wall. She stated Ron Gregory, their landscape architect, suggested using a lighter beige color than the other developments with the split face to give it some identity. The perimeter wall would be split face and the interior would be precision block with no cap. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated he likes the proposal as submitted. It gives it a softer exterior look. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the use of drought tolerant plants is good. The Mesquite trees are beautiful, but in the long term they blow over, and are a high maintenance. As it is a privately maintained development he is concerned about the use of decomposed granite as a lot of developments become unsightly due to the lack of maintenance. 5. Committee Member Cunningham stated the use of the Palm Springs Gold is interim until the landscaping fills in. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that if it its maintained until the groundcover grows in, it should be all right. Coachella Valley Water District will eventually require this type of landscaping to conserve water. He then askedif there will be a wall between the commercial site and the residential. Ms. Butler stated it will have to have a wall for sound attenuation. 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Bobbitt/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion 2000-026 recommending approval of the architectural plans for Site Development Permit 2000-686, as amended. Unanimously approved. B. Commere+al Property{mprovement Program 2000-002; a request of David Cetina, El Ranchito Mexican Restaurant for a funding request to install new landscaping fence, and awning with illuminated sign for the property located at 78-040 Avenida La Fonda. 1. Management Analyst Britt Wilson presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Reynolds stated he was glad to see this back and that the applicant was able to achieve his desired architectural style. G:\W PDOCS\ALRC l2-6-OO.wod 2 PH #D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2000 CASE NO: RW-C 2000-002 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA REQUEST: GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING FOR THE PROPOSED CLOSURE OF A 100-FOOT LONG SEGMENT OF BUTTERCUP LANE EAST OF GOLDENROD CIRCLE TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC LOCATION: BUTTERCUP LANE EAST OF GOLDENROD CIRCLE IN THE CACTUS FLOWER SUBDIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THE PROPOSED ACTION IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301, CLASS 1(C), OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. Tentative Tract 22982, commonly known as Cactus Flower, was conditionally approved by the City Council June 7,1988. The Cactus Flower subdivision was the first tentative tract map approved in the northeast quarter of Section 20. It was the first 40 acres of the 160 acres bounded by Fred Waring Drive, Jefferson Street, Miles Avenue, and Dune Palms Road to be proposed for development. At the time, the entire quarter section was zoned for residential development and it was anticipated that all future subdivisions in that quarter of Section 20 would be developed with public streets. As a result, the street layout in Cactus Flower was designed in such a manner that some of its streets would connect to future adjoining subdivisions in the northeast quarter of Section 20 to provide good circulation and access for the larger neighborhood lie the 160 acres) to the adjacent arterial streets. T TWDEPTPIanning Co mmission=1212.wpd Neighborhood circulation and access to arterial streets from any given neighborhood can not be appropriately discussed without first identifying issues that impact those transportation benefits. Local street access to arterial streets is regulated to ensure that a high level of regional mobility and safety on the arterial street is achieved. Unfortunately, high quality mobility and safety, and high quality local access, are inversely proportional. As the quality of local access to the arterial street increases, the quality of mobility and safety on the arterial street decreases. The quality of mobility and safety decreases with each additional side street that connects to the arterial street. Full turn intersections carry the inherent potential of becoming signalized intersections, if signal warrants are met. Signalized intersections are the major factor that decreases the mobility benefit, and unsignalized full turn intersections tend to carry a higher level of risk. Additionally„ these competing transportation benefits (mobility and safety versus local access) also have competing constituencies. For example, high quality local access is a benefit that accrues to a small group of residents at the expense of the community at large. While high quality mobility is a benefit that accrues to the community at large at the expense of small groups of residents in neighborhoods located adjacent to the arterial street. The traffic safety benefit actually accrues to both constituencies but its quality decreases as the number of full turn intersections increase, which is a factor in the local access benefit. Thus traffic safety, like mobility, is inversely proportional to local access to the arterial street. Since its not possible to achieve the maximum conceivable benefit in each of these competing benefit categories at every desired location, a balance between the competing benefits and constituencies must be established. The La Quinta General Plan strikes that balance by establishing spacing requirements for "full - turn" intersections on arterial streets. Thus, not all local streets that connect to an arterial street are allowed to have unrestricted access to the arterial street. If the local street intersection is located too close to the next full -turn intersection, some of the turning movements at the local street intersection will be restricted. The original Cactus Flower subdivision (Tract 22982) had only one connection to an arterial street. That connection is Blazing Star Trail where it connects to Dune Palms Road. The Cactus Flower street layout was purposely designed to avoid a direct connection to Fred Waring Drive because a full -turn intersection on Fred Waring was not allowed per the General Plan, and it would be difficult to enforce turning restrictions on Fred Waring without a raised median if a restricted -turn intersection were constructed. Thus, the Cactus Flower street layout provided 002 TAPWDEPT\Planning Commission=1212.wpd stubbed out streets to the adjacent vacant land on the east side and south side of Cactus Flower to connect to future subdivisions and help improve circulation and access opportunities to the nearby arterial streets. Cactus Flower II (Tract 24208) was the next subdivision to develop in the northeast quarter of Section 20. Cactus Flower II is located south of the original Cactus Flower subdivision. Blazing Star Trail, which starts in Cactus Flower, connects to Star Flower Trail in Cactus Flower II which in turn connects to Dune Palms Road. The street layout in Cactus Flower 11 also anticipated connecting to Miles Avenue through the vacant land located south of it via Verbena Drive. The Verbena Drive connection was just completed this year when the Wildflower subdivision developer installed its street improvements. The other planned street connection into a future subdivision adjacent to Cactus Flower was Buttercup Lane which was stubbed to the vacant undeveloped land located on it east side. This stubbed street end is the street segment proposed for street closure and the subject of this report. Circulation Alternatives The vacant undeveloped land located east of Cactus Flower is now proposed for development and the street layout for that tentative tract map (TT 24197) proposes to connect to Buttercup Lane as planned when Cactus Flower was originally approved. However, a large number of Cactus Flower residents turned out for the Planning Commission public hearing held on November 26, 2000, for TT 24197 and unanimously opposed the proposed Buttercup Lane connection to the proposed subdivision. The Buttercup Lane connection was originally planned to provide better circulation and access to nearby arterial streets for residents of Cactus Flower as well as the future subdivision. However, the residents of Cactus Flower unanimously view the connection as a detriment to their neighborhood rather than an enhancement. The Cactus Flower residents, some of whom have lived there for nearly 10 years, have grown accustom to the existing circulation routes that are currently available and have no interest in improving and shortening a circulation route to Fred Waring Drive or Jefferson Street that would benefit them if that benefit comes at the expense of introducing more traffic to the streets in their neighborhood from an adjoining neighborhood. While it is apparent the Cactus Flower residents have to interest in acquiring an improved circulation route to Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, the question that remains open for discussion is: will the future residents of TT 24197 need the Buttercup Lane connection to gain access to Dune Palms Road? TT 24197 will have a direct connection to Fred Waring Drive, but the connection will have a left - turn out restriction imposed to avoid creating a full -turn intersection. Full -turn intersections are allowed at 2,600-foot intervals on Fred Waring Drive per the T:\PWDEPT\Planning Commission\001212.wpd 003 General Plan. Thus, if the Buttercup Lane connection is not implemented, it will mean that in order for future residents of TT 24197 to go west on Fred Waring Drive, they will have two choices: 1) exit their subdivision via the full -turn connection to Miles Avenue, go west on Miles Avenue, then north to Fred Waring Drive via one of the arterial connections between Miles Avenue and Fred Waring Drive, or 2) exit their subdivision via the Fred Waring Drive connection, turn right and go east to the first left turn pocket to make a U-turn so westbound travel can be achieved. TT 24197 is conditioned to install the Fred Waring Drive median and it will include a left turn pocket just east of its Fred Waring Drive connection to serve the future subdivision located on the north side of Fred Waring Drive. Although, these two circulation routes to achieve westbound travel on Fred Waring Drive are modestly circuitous, they are no more circuitous than the routes Cactus Flower residents currently find to be acceptable with respect to gaining access to Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. Necessary Finding In order for the City to approve the proposed street closure, it is necessary the Planning Commission, and the City Council, to make a finding that the street is no longer needed for motorized vehicular traffic. The subject portion of Buttercup Lane proposed for closure is not currently used by motorized vehicular traffic for access to any location. It is a stubbed out street that passes between to storm water retention basins that serve the Cactus Flower subdivision. It was constructed as a future connection to the adjacent vacant undeveloped land to provided improved circulation opportunities to nearby arterial :streets for the residents of Cactus Flower and the future subdivision. However, the benefit that was planned and intended is not viewed by the residents of Cactus Flower as sufficiently needed when it comes at the expense of more adding traffic to the streets in their neighborhood. Thus it would appear there is no need for the subject segment of Buttercup Lane, or for the proposed future connection, with respect to providing a circulation route for the Cactus Flower residents. With respect to providing improved circulation opportunities for the future residents of TT 24197 there does not appear to be significant: detriment to eliminating the Buttercup Lane connection. While it can be argued their route to acquire westbound travel on Fred Waring Drive is circuitous, it is modestly circuitous, and doubtful if there is any actual increase in commute time to achieve travel in that direction versus traveling through the Cactus Flower neighborhood to achieve that end. Moreover, the modest amount of circuitous travel the future TT 24197 residents will encounter via the alternative routes previously discussed, that will occur if the Buttercup Lane connection is not made, is an inherent unavoidable compromise that comes with balancing the competing benefits between arterial street mobility and local access to the arterial street. 004 r:TWDEPr\P1annln9 commisslon=l 212.wpa Le-L il 41__. i ' _ '. 1 The General Plan has three policy statements (3-1.1.1 through 3-1 .1 .3) that address the need to have a street system capable of accommodating projected traffic demands produced by development of the City's planned Land Use Element. Pursuant to those policy statements, the General Plan includes a Circulation System Policy Diagram on page 3-9. The primary purpose of the Circulation System Policy Diagram is to provide a specific layout for the arterial and collector street system. The Diagram also shows the local street system that existed at the time the General Plan was adopted; however, the local street system is shown as background information to provide a visual relationship between the local street system and the arterial/ collector street system and should not be construed as part of the street layout required by the General Plan. In conclusion, the proposed street closure does not change the character of benefits accruing to the residents Cactus Flower and will have to perceivable change to the future residents of TT 24197. The circulation benefit decreases essential does not change for motorized vehicular traffic, the traffic safety benefit for pedestrians and residents in the both neighborhood increases in a more pronounced way because the street closure causes motorized traffic from outside the neighborhood to find a route that does not pass through the neighborhood. Additionally, the proposed street closure does not prevent pedestrians and bicycle traffic from continuing to use the area closed to motorized traffic. Given the parameters noted in this report, it is possible for the Planning Commission to make the following findings: 1. The proposed street closure is consistent with the General Plan. 2. The proposed closure area is no longer needed for motorized vehicular traffic. 005 TAPWDEPT\Planning Commission\001212.wpd Adopt Planning Commission Minute Motion 2000-, finding the street segment proposed for closure to be no long needed for motorized vehicular traffic, and closure to be consistent with the General Plan. Attachments: 1 . Cactus Flower Subdivision with Proposed Closure Area 2. Section 20, circa 1990 3. Northeast Quarter - Section 20, circa 2000 Prepar#d by: Sutjmitted by: Steven D. Slpekr, Senior Engineer Christine di lorio, planning Manager 006 TBPWDEPT\Planning Commission=1212.wpd ATTACHMENT #1 0 mLn 0� p� m co coco *207- w a rn o o c-¢ Go co GGo d cc Q a m w ui d MIL _ O Q w p w r f� r r m In _ r -3NV1 3: --51. 0 -0 co m o b'1NS 333 £'1HS 339 co N N U O v �Q'P\ LO a) rm �= rN- w 0 ^' a N d co 0 ,o cD o �^ �I� IIVz-0 1�'V 0 cLo ms � I cn M m r_�i �J Ln � rn to 1 c ko In rn N I IJ dD en O p o 0 no-)v t vN _ v a N W � Q �la �59 O N tf1 T LNn (A ui I� l0 m N40 � ° r- t0 to a N W d t0 tp c cq Q I en I N o---��al� d3�d _ - 4 101 —:iN-1 - 1 l o'10OU30, N N N N NE to i N N N M INn en ATTACHMENT #2 CACTUS FLOWER SUBDIVISION I a Z FRED WEARING DRIVE - JSj H W y fx W W W W MILES AVENUE SECTION 20, CIRCA 1990 ATTACHMENT #3 F J q w 2 Q NE QUARTER SECTION 20, CIRCA 2000 N 009 BI #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2000 REQUEST: FINDING OF GENERAL PLAN CONFORMITY FOR 25 CVWD CAPITAL PROJECTS PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65401 LOCATION: VARIOUS LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE: CITY APPLICANT: COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT/CIITY OF LA QUINTA BACKGROUND: California Government Code Section 65401 (CGC) requires that any agency responsible for planning and construction of major public works projects, must submit a list of such projects for the ensuing fiscal year to the jurisdiction in which they are to be located. It also requires that jurisdiction's planning agency (i.e. Community Development Department) to review and report to the official agency (i.e. Planning Commission) on the conformity of said project(s) with the adopted General Plan. 111;1SALIM4XIN�� Twenty-five Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) projects in the LA Quinta area are proposed in their CIP over the next 3 - 5 years (Attachment 1). Included in this attachment .are individual general location maps for each project. Note that not all projects are installations; some are pilot studies, acquisition and repair actions. Also, not all proposals are in La Quinta proper; some are related to valley -wide resource monitoring/distribution system development. Several General Plan policies are applicable and are referred to for conformance determination, as follows: LAND USE ELEMENT • Policy 2-6.3.1 identifies infrastructure -related utility facilities as permitted uses in any zoning district. The proposed projects accommodate this intent in that such infrastructure projects are recognized in the General Plan as necessary components to planned growth, as stipulated under the Land Use Element. OPEN SPACE ELEMENT • Policies 4-1.2.2 through 4-1.2.5 provide for the designation of flood -prone areas, and the protection and retention of recreational and agricultural resources., The proposed infrastructure projects shall further these policies through provision of necessary water -related resources and service, due to development as allowed under the General Plan. • Policy 4-2.1 .1 requires that all designated Open Space land use be subject to Policy 4-1.2.1, which states in part that utility facilities and extensions shall be limited to slopes under a 20% gradient, in accordance with the Hillside Conservation Zone Ordinance. However, pursuant to CGC Section 53091, "zoning ordinances of a county or city shall not apply to the location or construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage or transmission of water... . • Policy 4-5.1.3 requires the City to utilize existing and future utility easements as a means to connect open space areas. Some of the proposed projects could provide a means to accommodate this Policy. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION ELEMENT • Policies 6-4.1.2, 6-4.1.7 and 6-1.4.8 encourage the use of Colorado River water and reclaimed water resources as a means of conservation; there are projects identified which are intended to develop those resources. Policy 6-4.1 .5 requires that the City coordinate with CV'uVD to areas in the City which are appropriate for groundwater recharge. CVWD plans a pilot subsurface recharge facility near Lake Cahuilla at The Quarry as one of their proposed CIP projects. • Policies 6-4.2.1, 6-4.2.2 and 6-1.2.3 encourage the mitiigation of the migration of toxins into water resources. Projects such as the nitrate and arsenic treatment pilot studies will help to accomplish this. INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES ELEMENT • Several Policies within this element address provision of adequate supplies of potable and irrigation water sources, flood protection, and comprehensive sewage collection, treatment and disposal. The projects proposed by CVWD serve to not only further the implementation of these Policies, but also Policies related to fire protection, public health and safety, and other services. ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS ELEMENT • Several projects proposed by CVWD will address many Policies of this element. These Policies require protection from hazards due to fire and reflect the need for flood control. As stated earlier with respect to the Infrastructure and Public Services Element, these improvements will provide increased service and capacity to allow improved fire and flood protection measures. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000 - _, confirming a finding of conformity with the La Quinta General Plan for certain CVWD capital improvement projects to be located throughout the City. Prepared by: Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner Attachments: 1. CVWD Project Listing Submitted by: Christine di lorio Planning Manager u PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FINDINGS OF CONFORMITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65401, FOR CERTAIN CVWD CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65401 requires that any agency responsible for planning and construction of major public works projects, must submit a list of such projects for the ensuing fiscal year to the jurisdiction in which they are to be located, and; WHEREAS, said Section 65401 also requires the ,jurisdiction's planning agency (i.e. Community Development Department) to review and report to the official agency (i.e. Planning Commission) on the conformity of sand project(s) with the adopted General Plan. WHEREAS, the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) did submit to the City a listing of 25 proposed Capital Improvement Projects, which will be undertaken over the next 3 - 5 years in or near the La Quinta City limits, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 12th day of December, 2000, hold a public meeting to consider a finding of conformity with the General Plan for said 25 improvement projects, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did make the following findings of conformity with respect to the proposed CVWD capital projects: The proposed CVWD capital projects are in conformance with the La Quinta General Plan, as follows; A. LAND USE ELEMENT - Policy 2-6.3.1 identifies infrastructure -related utility facilities as permitted uses in any zoning district. This accommodates the intent that such infrastructure projects are recognized in the General Plan as necessary components to planned growth, as stipulated under the Land Use Element. B. OPEN SPACE ELEMENT - Policies 4-1.2.2 through 4-1.2.5 provide for the designation of flood -prone areas, and the protection and retention of recreational and agricultural resources. The proposed infrastructure projects shall further these policies through provision of water -related resources and services made necessary due to development under the General Plan. resopcCV W D.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000 - Policy 4-2.1 .1 requires that all designated Open Space land use be subject to Policy 4-1.2.1, which states in part that utility facilities and extensions shall be limited to slopes under a 20% gradient, in accordance with the Hillside Conservation Zone Ordinance. However, pursuant to CGC Section 53091, "zoning ordinances of a county or city shall not apply to the location or construction of facilities for the production, generation, storage or transmission of water... . Policy 4-5.1.3 requires the City to utilize existing and future utility easements as a means to connect open space areas. Some of the proposed projects could provide a means to accommodate this Policy. C. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION ELEMENT - Policies 6-4.1.2, 6-4.1 .7 and 6-1.4.8 encourage the use of Colorado River and reclaimed water resources as a means of conservation; there are projects identified which are intended to develop those resources. Policy 6-4.1.5 requires that the City coordinate with CVWD to areas in the City which are appropriate for groundwater recharge. CVWD plans a pilot subsurface recharge facility near Lake Cahuilla at The Quarry as one of their proposed CIP projects. Policies 6-4.2.1, 6-4.2.2 and 6-1.2.3 encourage the mitigation of the migration of toxins into water resources. Projects such as the nitrate and arsenic treatment pilot studies will help to accomplish this. D. INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES ELEMENT -Several Policies within this element address provision of adequate supplies of potable and irrigation water sources, flood protection, and comprehensive sewage collection, treatment and disposal. The projects proposed by CVWD serve to not only further the implementation of these Policies, but also Policies related to fire protection, public health and safety, and other services. E. ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS ELEMENT -Several projects proposed by CVWD will address many Policies of this element. These Policies require protection from hazards due to fire and reflect the need for flood control. As stated earlier with respect to the Infrastructure and Public Services Element, these improvements will provide increased service and capacity to allow improved fire and flood protection measures. resopcCV W D.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000 - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby this finding of conformity for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this the 12th day of December, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California resopcCV W D.wpd 5FF_� H . �ATEq ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY �TSTRICS �( STI.>,J COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1o`✓B • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (760) 398-2651 A95ia t� /i/ s/a� ,gyp �/ OFFICERS DIRECTORS THOMAS E. LEVY. GENERAL MANAGER -CHIEF ENGINEER TELLIS CODEKAS, PRESIDENTBERNARDINE SUTTON. SECRETARY RUSSELL KITAHARA, VICE PRESIDENT OWEN McC00K, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER JOHN W. McFADDEN November 7 2000 REDWINE AND SHERRILL, ATTORNEYS JOHN P. POWELL, Jr. PETER NELSON File: 1150. 1150.14 . City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 NOV 0 2000 Gentlemen: In accordance with the provisions of Section 65401 of the Governmental Code, this district hereby advises your agency that it proposes the following projects in your jurisdiction: Irrigation 1. Upgrade L. 3 Pumping Plant, Item No. 01.05. 2. Extension of Dike Retaining Wall at Lake Cahuilla, Item No. 01.31. Domestic Water 1. Cahuilla Zone Reservoir, Item No. 35.06. 2. Downtown La Quinta Main Replacements —Phase VI, Item No. 35.10. E/ 3. LEE Quinta Westward Ho Area Main Replacements —Phase VI, Item No. 35.11. 4. Lower La Quinta Reservoir Site Study and Acquisition, Item No. 35.16, 5. Lower La Quinta Zone Well No. 1, Item No. 35.20. 6. Well 6722—Relocation, Item No. 35.27. 7. Upper La Quinta Zone Booster Station 06601 Upgrade, Item No. 35.28. 8. Mid -Valley In -lieu Recharge Project, Item No. 35.35. 9. Dual Piping System Program, Item No. 35.37. 10. Well Head Arsenic Treatment Pilot Study, Item No. 35.58. 11. Lower La Quinta Zone Well No. 2, Item No. 35.63. ATTACHMENT 1 TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY City of La Quinta -2- November 7, 2000 Domestic Water - Continued 12. Valley Zone Well No. 2, Item No. 35.64. 13. Dual Piping System Program, Item No. 35.72. 14. Dual Piping System Program, Item No. 35.94. 15. Washington Street Main Extension, Item No. 35.111. 16. Well Head Nitrate Treatment Pilot Study, Item No. 35.54. 17. Lower La Quinta Zone Reservoir, Item No. 35.57, 18. Middle La Quinta Zone Reservoir 6631 Site Grading, Item No. 35.115. Sanitation Pilot Subsurface Recharge Facility, Item No. 72.06. 2. Lift Station 55-01—Paint Interior and Exterior Surfaces; Repair and Reinstall Wet Wall Liner; Install Guide Rails for Pumps, Item No. 82.11. 3. Lift Station 55-0I—Bypass Piping, Item No. 82.12. 4. improvement District No. 55—Gravity Sewer Lining Repairs in Highway I I I at Washington Street, Item No. 82.15. 5. Mid -Valley Force Main Segment No. 4, Item No. 82.22. The projects are included in the budget and the capital improvement program. The capital improvement program reflects our proposed activities over the next three to five years. Enclosed are maps indicating the locations of the proposed projects. After the completion of your review, please forward this information to your public works department so our work can be planned and coordinated with your proposed projects. If you have any questions please call Dan Parks, director of engineering, extension 262. Enclosures/as PRC..j l\eng\draftinemov\cipproj ectl n Yours very truly, Tom Levy General Manager -Chief Engi7er COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No.1 C.I.P. No. 01.05 Project Title: Upgrade L-3 Pumping Plant C.'W.I.P. No. Description: Modify existing L-3 pump plant to accommodate current and future users in conjunction with the Jefferson Street widening project. Plat 5-7-33-4. Status: Project authorized. =Engineetrin, ConstructionConstruction 01/00 Start Date: 07/00 End Date: 09/00 oan.IFr.T COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2002-03 Total $ 0 $ 60,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 60,000 r o e ]oA ]] el A AW. 10 t T IaJ L 1 • I ' La a0.e e R I � AV'E• 4G NZo /u auttne n ai eo'i A✓E• 46 " t� P130JEXT AR w F ur a o a u us i !� i Iw t • a 0• ao a ]o, •31 f• • I • a ]� 0 AVE. 50 T. a 9.aL a f 1 o MO e u ao �• .PST 1 a ao ]' 10 20.e i fit. 11°.a 0•I82A � = ILI •ra' COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No.1 C.I.P. No. 01.31 Project Title: Extension of Dike Retaining Wail at Lake C.W.I.P. No. Cahuilla Description: Extend dike retaining wall to complete enclosure of a. desilting basin with Lake Cahuilla. Plat 6-7-20-1. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: 08/01 Start Date: 09/01 End Date: 11/01 PROJECT COSTS 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 1 2002-03 1 2002-03 1 Total 0 $ 100,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 100,000 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.06 Project Title: Cahuilla Zone Reservoir C.1N.I.P. No. 110.426.8 Description: Install a 10.0 mg reservoir and appurtenances to serve the Cahuilla zone and eliminate the overtaxed hydropneumatic system and meet area demands. Status: Construction substantially complete. Reservoir in service. Due to Bighorn lambing season completion to conclude in July 2000. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: 03/98 Start Date: 07/99 End Date: 08/00 PROJECT COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 2000-01 2001.02 2002-03 2002-03 Total cl� 2.100.000 $ 150,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 2,250,000 SECTION 20 1 PROPOSED 36-010 1MNSYtSS10N MW PGA WEST COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.10 Prolect Title: Downtown La Quinta Main Replacements C.W.I.P. No. 110.427.6 -Phase VI Description: Install 11,000 feet of 6-, 8- and 12-inch pipeline in conjunction with City of La Quinta Assessment District 2000-1 street improvement program in downtown La Quinta cove area. Plat Nos. 6-6-1-4 and 6-7-6-3. Engineering Construction Construction Stan Date: 12/99 Start Date: 07/00 End Date: 12/00 PROJECT COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 71-2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2002-03 Total $ 0 $ 600,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 600,000 32 14 ' •r IR-� rM AL E.. �i .� �: �.•`�yL7i11M� p F v :: O�'. /i1 wry I s .1�,:C7„ I � ! • •lug � � �uw ..1i1!1*L. _ ■ r 11� na y . tit ` PROJECT AREA i c L '' AA A i - IOU I NTA I COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.11 Project Title: La Quinta Westward Ho Area Main C.1N.I.P. No. 110.427.5 Replacements --Phase VI Description: Install 3,300 feet of 6- and 12-inch pipeline ahead of the L.a Quinta Assessment District street improvement program on Horseshoe Road, Roadrunner Lane and in the Westward Ho area. As part of La Quinta Assessment District 2000-01. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: Stan Date: 07/00 End Date: 12/00 PROJECT COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 T2000,01 2001-02 2002-03 2002-03 Total e n S 160.000 $ 0$ 0$ 0$ 160.000 A I DIW-44 5 lrib: -�i C� I rr. N� 33 5 49 CTR2�—J COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.16 Lower La Quinta Reservoir Site Study and C!V1I.I.P. No. 110.417.7 Acquisition Description: Purchase land for a 300' x 300' reservoir site for the Lower La Quinta zone. Status: Preliminary site investigation, surveying and BLNI coordination is underway. rEngitn-eering Construction Constriction Date Start Date: End Date: DRO.IFCT COSTS VGVY 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2002-03 1 Total $ 22,000 $ 178,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 200,000 INDIAN ,IWELLSn; �i I 1 e N I 1 � I —A; QUINTA ------------------- CA 4-L TICAM I I PROJECT AREA ■ I I I VVAI+nr-LLN vML r-T vvA l En UL7 i IINO I Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000.2001 Cost Center No. 35 Lower La Quinta Zone Well No. 1 C.W.I.P. No. 35.20 Install a well and pumping plant with backup onsite generator power in the Lower La Quinta Zone to meet increased demands. Site to be determined. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: 01/00 Stan Date: 07/00 End Date: 01/01 Before 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 0 $ 650,000 $ 0 2002-03 Total COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.27 Well 6722--Relocation C.W.I.P. No. Relocate and redrill PGA West Well 6722 at a new site in the PGA West area. Well will provide additional supply to Cahuilla Zone. New site location to be determined. Engineenng Construction Construction Start Date: 07/00 Start Date: 08/00 End Date: 11 /00 PROJECT COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2002-03 Total $ 0 $ 650,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 650,000 /0 N f ' LA QUINTA I { {7 I AV \ _ _ s s.n .m_ "v 5 y R.1 f JL ads i 7 N' 7 •fY. f 5� � l •.l 1 yy iy� WE !� 1 .. r PROJECT ARE " � � { `` t 4. •uu i .__ i w AIRPORT BLVD f� N„t Ln,i � 'a7�irrc� s ,• ,`4 'A __•" yv�s..` .___._J , _ ';y_ _..•. ---- - -------- 2D.. 22 �y�! p t �i_`Sn.ey ZI •r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.28 Upper La Quinta Zone Booster Station 06601 C_W.I.P. No. Upgrade Upgrade or relocate existing Booster Station 06601, including power upgrades, to add pumping capacity for water transfers from the middle La Quinta zone to the upper La Quinta zone. 61516PIat 6-6-13-1. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: 07/00 Start Date: 01 /01 End Data: 05/01 oon tCrT CARTS Before 2000-01 2000-01 2001.02 2002-03 Beyond 2002-03 Total $ 0 $ 500,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 500,000 -15 IIIjs I ( Elc a m a I I�I!L I c � _ > LA ° M i I� Ill H 0U I NTA PROJECT AREA- _...1 / ...,• tut. nfm {rVAVr1CLLA VALLCr YYA I Crf UM I HI :I Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 Mid -Valley In -lieu Recharge Project C!W.I.P. No. Preliminary design and environmental impact documents for groundwater recharge via source substitution for golf courses in the Mid Coachella Valley. The substitute water supply would be Colorado River water exchanged for State Project Water. Study will assess the alternatives of routing water from MWDSC's turnout at Whitewater or the installation of a new pump station on the Coachella Canal Engineering Construction Constriction Start Date: 07/00 Start Date: 07/01 End Date: 06/05 Before ' "_ 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2002'03 Total 0 $ 1 VU#4%,nCLLA YALLC I YYA I CR EJ1%) I ML, I Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.37 Dual Piping System Program C'.W.I.P. No. Description: Funding to provide for the expansion and incorporation of a dual piping system within the east valley areas in conjunction with developers growth and new regulations. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: Stan Date_ _ End Date: Before Beyond 2000-11 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2002-03 Total 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 500,000 y ^ ,�T I -- — - I o�VE � g ,. RIVERSIDE COUNTY L/Mf 1 L.N OFF CD COUNT [/ /IL COUNTY L/NF-*, T. 9 5. I:UAL;HhLLA VALLt1 WA I thi UI51 Kit; I Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. Project Title: Well Head Arsenic Treatment Pilot Study C.W.I.P. No. Install a pilot part to evaluate arsenic removal efficiency at a well in the east valley to determine final cost versus production and delivery production facility expansion requirements. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: End Date: Start Date onn-iccT MATS Beyond Before 2000-01 2000.01 2001-02�2.03 21102-03 Total $ 0 $ 0 $ 200,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 200,000 •Z� -} '� •- 1 T.61 .� _1I r r- TI Q1t -A yi• hI tti\� � - - - - JL •7 ^ I s<A� OEGO COUMTT Ll RIVeR Of couwrr LIM ,a LOUIYIr (INE it • w"F- r rrr+ r cn u10 r nw r Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 20DD-2001 Cost Center No. 35 Lower La Quinta Zone Well No. 2 C.I.P. No. C.W.I.P. No. Install a well and pumping plant with backup onsite generator power in the Lower La Quinta Zone to meet increased demands. Site to be determined. Engineering Construction uonstrucuon Start Date: 12/01 Stan Date: 07/01 End Date: 01 /02 PROJECT COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 T72000-01 2001-02 2002-03 20D2-03 Total Q 0 $ 0 $ 650,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 650,000 t,.UAtiMtLLA VALLtT VVA 1 tM UIJ 1 Mlt.1 Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 20OD-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.64 Valley Zone Well No. 2 C.W.I.P. No. Install a well and pumping plant with backup onsite generator power in the Valley Zone to meet increased demands. Site currently proposed on Marriot Desert Springs Hotel site. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: 01/01 Start Date: 07/01 End Date: 01/02 PROJECT COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2(102-03 Total $ 0 $ 0 $ 650,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 650.000 i l;UAt ritLLA VALLLY WA I tM UI, I Fill; I Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.72 Project Title: Dual Piping System Program C.W.I.P. No. Description: Funding to provide for the expansion and incorporation of a dual piping system within the east valley areas in conjunction with developers growth and new regulations. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: Start Date: End Date: PRLiJECT COSTS 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 1 2002-03 1 2002-03 1 Total Q n (9 0 $ 500,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 500,0 R. I11. N �/VMLrr7CLLN ♦ NLLC r vvA t CPI U191. 1 mm, I Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 Dual Piping System Program C.W.I.P. No. Funding to provide for the expansion and incorporation of a dual piping system within the east valley areas in on conjunction with developers growth and and new regulations. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: Start Date: End Date: 2000-01 1 2000-01 1 2001-02 1 2002-03 1 21302-03 Total $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 5nn_nnn � n ¢ rnn nnnnn jl W�o` .7P 1 z - T 95. R.TE T COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000.2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.111 Washington Street Main Extension C.tN.I.P. No. Install 3,000 feet of 18-inch transmission main on Washington from Fred Waring to Delaware, thus completing a La Quinta and Valley zone break. Plat 5-6-13-1,4. Engineering Construction Construction Stan Date• Mas�Plan Stan Date: End Date: PROJECT COSTS Beyond Before 2000_01T7 :20:0:0�:=20012 2002-03 2002-03 Total $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 Ra a R a s ` N - 4 M COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 35.54 Well Head Nitrate Treatment Pilot Study C: W.I.P. No. Hire a consultant and install a pilot plant for four months to evaluate nitrate removal efficiency at Well 5704 to determine final cost versus production and delivery/production facility expansion requirements. Engineering Construction Construction Stan Date: 08/01 Start Date: 11/01 End Date: 05/02 non iGPT I'nCTC Betore 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Beyond 2002-03 Total $ 0 $ 0 $ 300,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 300,000 C•I �l �` �- u� irrN AVENUE HIGHWAY 111 - PROJECT AREA AVENUE 48 — i DR1VE LA QU I NTA 11rn•-.. .��, :. •AVENUE ,vE.,.• •�' � w�7 J.��,,., .� ,tom:' ' 50IT i �' a'rJa� M COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.57 Protect Title: Lower La Quinta Zone Reservoir C. W.I.P. No. Description: Add a 5.0 mg reservoir to the existing 5.0 mg reservoir adding storage to meet the demands of the Lower La Quinta pressure zone. Plat 6-6-13-1. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: 07/98 Start Date: 07/01 End Date: 01 /02 PROJECT COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 1 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2002-03 Total W- 11" 0 $ 0 0 N \� 1 1 1 I 1 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 35 C.I.P. No. 35.115 Middle La Quinta Zone Reservoir 6631 Site C.1N.I.P. No. Grading Perform necessary site earthwork to shed overflow and storm drainage, and aesthetically hide reservoir from view. Engineering In conjunction Construction Construction Start Date: with street work Start Date: End Date: PROJFCT COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 20(12-03 Total $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 IE •�'��i At al ;fit 1� otl .•� � ai 1 � .+ t�� .I .�: , t• t ;� 1 t � M 1 1 :1 � 11 I •; t1 � 1 PROJECT AREA ®��O COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 82 C.I.P. No. 82.11 Lift Station 55-01 --Paint Interior and Exterior C.W.I.P. No. Surfaces; Repair and Reinstall Wet Wall Liner Install Guide Rails for Pumps Paint, coat and rehabilitate interior and exterior surfaces as necessary. Includes painting MCC, piping, generator, equipment, and auxiliary items. Install pump guide rails. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: 08/00 Start Date: 01/01 End Date: 06/01 PROJECT COSTS Before Beyond 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2002-03 Total $ 0 $ 125,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 125,000 n L LL.) 7� W LA QUINTA 0-111110JECT AREA L z%7w7ir:3% L ZAR sm —A VENUE 50, V-41 y;1_. AVENUE%nws I C) n ... ... 7 Z z j all= ....... L 6a tj all, I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 72 C.I.P. No. 72.06 Pilot Subsurface Recharge Facility C.W.I.P. No. Installation of piping, filters and subsurface drip linen to determine the optimum design for a full scale facility near Lake Cahuilla at The Quarry. w. �� .ill m Z'00':. � h t U, COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 82 (Project Title: Lift Station 55-01--Bypass Piping C.M.P. No. 12 Design and construct permanent bypass piping connecting the suction manhole with the lift station force main. Includes site for portable pump with appurtenances. Permits bypass pumping during periods when the channel has water in it. To be done with 1999-2000 CIP No. 82.11 rail installation. 1 Description COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 82 15 Improvement District No.55--Gravity Sewer C.W.I.P. No. Lining Repairs in Highway 111 at Washington Street Evaluate and install an insitu type liner in an existing 8-inch gravity sewer near the intersection of Washington Street and Highway 111 in La Quinta. The approximate 275 feet of ductile iron pipe is under Washington Street. The liner shall extend the sewer life significantly. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: N/A Start Date: 01/01 End Date: 03/01 PROJECT COSTS 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 0 $ 19,000 $ MILES h II'I i A 4 I S _A QUINTA 30 2002-03 2002-03 Total 1 $$� 0 $ 0 $ 19, cl 4�7b.�{iAV ild� i" x LM( U WWA ttiWM R u IuirxrA P. 1 PROJECT .AREA q COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Cost Center No. 82 C.I.P. No. 82.22 Project Title: Mid -Valley Force Main Segment No. 4 C. W.I.P. No. Description: Installation of an additional 18-inch pipeline between Fred Waring Drive at Washington Street and Lift Station 55-01. May use Adams Street alignment. Project will be necessary if flows from WRP 10 are transported to WRP 4 in the future. Engineering Construction Construction Start Date: 10/01 Start Date: 03/02 End Date: 09/02 PROJECT COSTS Before Eieyond 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2002-03 Total $ p $ 0 $ 200,010 $ 2,000,000 $ 0 $ 2,200,000 24 All 1 6... n • � ,' _ I Vim "� W1� �� .ram `.t i I— •� Yi1 INDIAN WELLS; y PROJECT AREALai ix s .4. ri• A VISION FOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUMMARY VERSION Riverside County is a family of special communities in a remarkable environmental setting. By the year 2020... Riverside County is a diverse, vibrant family of communities. Each distinct community is a focal Point for educational and job opportunities. Our integrated approach to planning ties together preservation of critical multi -purpose open spaces, operation of high capacity transportation corridors, and development of quality communities ranging from urban villages to suburban neighborhoods to rural enclaves. As a result, Riverside County is a world -class place to live, work and play. The people of Riverside County continue our commitment to increased opportunities for every man, woman and child. We value the diversity of our people and their communities, preservation of our significant environmental resources, commitment to quality development, innovative an effective methods for shaping our communities, and the power of collaboration and partnerships that leverage our ability to get important things done. Those values and the plans they inspired have brought us a long way. Perhaps our achievements will help you understand why we believe we are on the right path. Population Growth Growth is focused in areas that are well served by public facilities and services. Major transportation corridors link our communities and nearby open space preserves help define them. It is clear what areas are to be developed and which are to be preserved. The resulting pattern of growth concentrates development in key areas that facilitate a diversified transportation system and broader life style choices. Land is used efficiently. Our neighborhoods and communities operate at a human scale, and transit systems to supplement the automobile serve them. Our Communities and Their Neighborhoods Your choice of communities and neighborhoods is unlimited. From sophisticated urban villages to quality suburban neighborhoods to casual rural enclaves, we have them all. Quality schools and their programs are the focal points of our neighborhoods. Our older communities have matured gracefully and we boast several new communities as well. They prove that quality of life comes in many different forms. Housing Our housing choices include entry level housing for first time buyers, modest but substantial housing for our agricultural workers, apartments serving the rental market, seniors' housing, world class golf communities, and exclusive custom estates. You will also find "smart" housing with the latest in built-in technology as well as refurbished historic units. Riverside County continues to draw people who are looking for a blend of quality and value in their housing choices. Transportation Our transportation system has more than kept pace with the growth in population, employment and tourism and their demands for mobility. It has also resulted in significant reductions in congestion. New and expanded transportation corridors connect key growth centers and link with the region. Several major corridors contain transit systems and, where transit service is not yet operating, the capacity for it is designed into the corridors. These corridors reflect a high regard for the environment by providing critical wildlife crossings to sustain habitat value. Our airports provide convenient worldwide connections as a critical mobility link for the business community and the general public. Conservation and Open Space Resources The preservation of our environmental resources, recreation needs, habitat systems, and visual heritage as one comprehensive, multi -purpose open space system draws nationwide attention. These spaces help to form distinctive edges for many of our communities or clusters of communities. Open space is acquired in a variety of creative and equitable The Riverside County Integrated Project is joinfly sponsored by the County of Riverside, the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Southern California Association of Governments. Riverside County Integrated Project as 1746 Spruce Street o Riverside, California 92507 R \E-7 ways. The needs of our priceless habitats, capacity for all forms of recreation, and rights of property owners are carefully balanced. Community centers, museums, and performing arts facilities reflect a commitment to cultural resource preservation. Air Quality We now have clear skies despite phenomenal regional growth. Technical advances in smog reduction from motor vehicles continue to be made, and Riverside County industries are preeminent in these technologies. Our expanded supply of jobs reduces the need for people here to commute outside the County. Enhanced communication systems, increased use of transit, and focused development areas that once again make walking or using the bicycle attractive choices help considerably. So, too, has the County's continued influence on regional air quality strategies. Jobs and Economy Job growth is spectacular, exceeding the population growth to the point where the ratio of jobs to workers is at an all time high. Our choice of jobs is quite diversified. Clusters of new industries attract skilled labor, professionals and executives alike. Extensive vocational training programs, coordinated with schools and colleges, are a constant source of opportunities for youth and workers who seek further advancement and better career choices. Agricultural Lands Long a major foundation of our economy and our culture, agriculture remains a thriving part of Riverside County. While we have lost some agriculture to other forms of development, other lands have been converted to agriculture. We remain a major agricultural force in California and in the global agricultural market. Educational System Quality education is available from pre-school through graduate programs because our educational priorities are firmly established. Partnerships involving private enterprise and cooperative programs between local governments and school districts make the educational system an integral part of our communities. Cooperative use of facilities enhances our neighborhoods through shared use of recreation space and meeting spaces. Our students in the top ranks within California. Plan Integration The coordinated planning for multi -purpose open space systems, community enhancing land use patterns, and a diversified transportation system has paid off handsomely. Integration of these major components of community building has resulted in a degree of certainty and clarity of direction not commonly achieved in the face of such dynamic change. Our General Plan provides clear direction for preservation and development. Cities, too, benefit from this integration. Financial Realities Creative, yet practical financing programs provide the necessary leverage to achieve our common aspirations. Our delivery of public services and facilities is highly cost effective. Our people recognize and accept the fact that those who benefit must bear a fair share of the cost of improvements. There is strong public support for our well thought out financing initiatives. Intergovernmental Cooperation Our cities and other governmental agencies commonly engage in cooperative arrangements. This way of doing public business is one of our traditions and Riverside County is viewed as a model in this regard. People are heavily involved in their communities and voluntary initiatives occur at a record rate. The Riverside County Integrated Project is jointly sponsored by the County of Riverside, the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Southern California Association of Governments. Riverside County Integrated Project � 1746 Spruce Street is Riverside, California 92507 V, WESTERN COACHELLA VALLEY (WCV) AREA PLAN DESCRIPTION This section provides a general description of the location and physical characteristics of the WCV Area Plan region. Location The Western Coachella Valley area is located in the eastern portion of Riverside County and encompasses approximately 400 unincorporated square miles. The area is bordered by San Bernardino County and the Joshua Tree National Park to the north, the San Gorgonio Pass Area Plan area to the west, REMAP (Riverside Extended Mountain Area Plan) to the southwest, and the Eastern Coachella Area Plan to the east. Encompassing the cities of Palm Springs, Palm Desert, Desert Hot Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Indian Wells, Indo and La Quinta, the Western Coachella Valley area includes several sphere -of -influence areas totaling 93,880 acres. Physical Features The Western Coachella Valley area is a predominantly desert and mountainous region and contains a number of significant natural open space features: Whitewater River The Whitewater River is the major drainage course in the area and has perennial flow in some areas, becoming dry as water percolates the groundwater basin or is diverted for use. Coachella Valley Preserve/Thousand Palms Canyon & Oasis Located 10 miles east of Palm Springs and north of Interstate 10, the Coachella Valley Preserve encompasses approximately 20,000 acres and contains the last undisturbed watershed in the Coachella Valley and the sources of water -carried sand that create the dune habitat of the fringe -toed lizard. Peninsula Ranges Composed mainly of the Santa Rosa Mountains and the San Jacinto Mountains, this system of bold, high mountains including the 8,716 foot high Toro Peak in the Santa Rosa Mountains, and 10,804 foot San Jacinto Peak in the San Jacinto Mountains, runs north to northwest. The Peninsular Ranges act as an effective barrier to the eastward moving storms and cooler air masses of the southern California coastal area. Indio Hills With a maximum elevatiion of 1,740 feet, the Indio Hills are located in the east central portion of the Coachella Valley and are the largest unit of hills within the Valley area. 'The hills are bordered on the southwest by the San Andreas Fault and are divided in their central portion by Thousand Palms Canyon. Little San Bernardino Mountains Reaching elevations over 5,000 feet, the Little San Bernardino Mountains frame the northeastern edge of the Coachella Valley. Urban land uses found in the Western Coachella Valley area include rural and suburban residential, commercial, industrial, mining, wind energy, and recreational uses. Open space uses are the primary land uses in the area. Existing residential developments in the area are located primarily in five areas: Bermuda Dunes/Washington Street Corridor; Sky Valley; North Palm Springs/Dillon Road corridor; and Thousand Palms and San Gorgonio Pass/Highway 62 corridor. San Gorgonio This area extends west of Indian Avenue to the foothills north and east, south to Palm Springs, and west through the San Gorgonio Pass. The area is generally characterized by a large expanse of open desert, and isolated pockets of development. The highest concentration of commercial wind development in the County is found in this area. North Palm Springs The Dillon Road corridor, from North Palm Springs on the west to Bennet Road on the east, is characterized by strip commercial development, and a mix of conventional subdivisions, mobile homes, and recreational vehicle parks. The Riverside County Imegrated Project is jointly sponsored by the County of Riverside, the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Southern California Association of Covernme ts. Riverside County Integrated Project - 1746 Spruce Street o Riverside, California 92507 Sky Valley The Sky Valley community is located along Dillon Road between Thousand Palms Canyon Road and Bennet Road. The area is characterized by rural land uses and limited commercial uses along Dillon Road. A limited number of higher density developments such as mobile home and recreation vehicle parks occurs in the area. Thousand Palms The Thousand Palms area is located along Interstate 10 at the intersection of Ramon Road. This unincorporated area is characterized by mobilehome parks, single-family residential lots and rural residential development. Limited commercial and industrial developments are scattered along Ramon Road and Varner Road. Auto -oriented commercial uses (i.e., truck stops, motels, fast food restaurants, etc.) are located at the intersection of Interstate 10 and Monterey Avenue. Bermuda Dunes This area is located at the intersection of Washington Street and Interstate 10, north of the cities of Indian Wells, Indio and La Quinta. The area has good access to Interstate 10 and Highway 111. Community sewer and water service is available. The area south of I-10 is characterized by lower density residential resort -type development and limited higher density development along Washington Street and 42nd Street. The area north of I-10 consists of Sun City, a residential -golf community, mobilehome parks, rural residential, agricultural areas and Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat. Circulation The circulation network in the unincorporated area of Western Coachella Valley consists primarily of two- lane rural arterial roads, residential collectors and dirt roads. Interstate-10 serves as the planning area's major highway, bisecting the planning area in a northwest -southeast direction. Parallel to and south of I-10, Highway 111 serves as the major corridor through most of the incorporated areas of the area plan. Other highways include SR-62, connecting the Coachella Valley to San Bernardino County through Desert Hot Springs, and SR-74 (Pines to Palms Highway), which connects the Coachella Valley to Western Riverside County through the Santa Rosa Mountains. Prominent roads serving the unincorporated areas include Dillon Road, Ramon Road, Palm Drive, and Thousand Palms Canyon Road. Centrally located in the Coachella Valley, the Bermuda Dunes Airport is a private facility with a 5,000-foot airstrip that primarily serves the guests of neighboring resorts. Recently renovated, the airport has made significant upgrades to the runway, ramp, hangars and lobby facilities. On -site facilities include fuel, maintenance, restaurant, airpark, car rental, flight school, aircraft sales, rentals and charters. The runway is open 24 hours per day. Palm Springs International Airport, located in the City of Palm Springs is owned by the City and operated by Department of Aviation. The airport serves the entire Coachella Valley and meets the challenge of a booming convention and tourism based economy. ALTERNATIVE 1 - ]Existing Western Coachella Valley Community Plan, Zoning, and Specific Plan Land Use Designations The Alternative 1 land use scenario is primarily a reflection of the current land use designations as detailed in the existing Western Coachella Valley Community Plan and/or County zoning designations, the County Open Space and Conservation Map, and adopted specific plans. ALTERNATIVE 2 -Cities Sphere of Influence Much of the Western Coachella Valley area lies within cities' spheres -of -influence. The cities of Palm Springs, Desert Hot Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, La Quinta, and Indio all have sphere -of -influence areas. Indian Wells is the only city within the planning area without a sphere -of -influence. This alternative generally reflects the land uses as interpreted from the cities' General Plan Land Use Maps. The remaining areas reflect current County zoning and open space land use designations as detailed in Alternative 1. The Riverside County Integrated Project is jointly sponsored by the County of Riverside, the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Southern California Association of Governments. Riverside County Integrated Project - 1746 Spruce Street o Riverside, California 92507 ALTERNATIVE 3 - Reflection of the RCIP Vision Statement The intent of Alternative 3 is to implement, as appropriate, the concepts identified in the Summary Draft RCIP Vision Statement, located in the preface of this report. In addition, consistent with the Vision, the alternative identifies those lands designated as "Existing Conservation Areas" in the Draft Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation and Natural Communities Conservation Plan (CVAG MSHCP) as Open Space - Conservation Habitat. Alternative 3 proposes significant changes throughout the Western Coachella Valley. It attempts to clearly identify those areas well -suited for development and those areas where development should be limited, based on a variety of factors including but not limited to accessibility of roads and other infrastructure, natural hazards, sensitive habitat, and scenic value. This alternative offers a wide variety of housing and employment uses, while clearly designating areas for rural and open space uses. From the rural enclave of Sky Valley to the more urbanized Thousand Palms, most of the Rural and Community Development land uses, including both residential and nonresidential uses, are concentrated in and around the existing unincorporated communities of Western Coachella Valley. RCIP Vision Alternative 3 responds to the following topical issues contained within the draft RCIP Vision: Population Growth - Alternative 3 proposes a mix of residential land uses ranging from Very Low Density Residential to High Density Residential uses. Higher density residential areas are clustered near commercial centers and employment nodes, thus promoting more compact development and greater land use/public services efficiency. Open Space and Rural land uses separate Community Development areas, creating identifiable community edges and enhancing community identity. Communities and Neighborhoods - Alternative 3 attempts to establish more identifiable communities by proposing significantly decreased residential densities in the more remote desert areas, which in several instances serve to define natural edges for existing rural desert communities. This results in more compact residential areas surrounded by Open Space and Rural uses. More intense residential development, including areas designated for Low Residential and higher density uses, are proposed to be located within more urbanized unincorporated communities such as Thousand Palms and Bermuda Dunes, and within city sphere areas. Housing - Alternative 3 proposes a mix of diverse residential areas, ranging from Rural Residential to High Density Residential uses near more urbanized areas. The provision of land for more compact, higher density residential along with traditional low density residential areas allows housing opportunities for households of varying sizes and incomes, and creates a greater mix of residents within neighborhoods. The combination of an abundance of housing near employment and commercial centers, a variety of housing types throughout the planning area, and efficient delivery of public services, would result in a vibrant community offering a multitude of opportunities to a diverse market of future residents. Transportation - Employment center, commercial, light industrial and higher density residential areas have been located along the proposed major roadway corridors in Western Coachella Valley to take advantage of proposed roadway capacities and maximize the area's accessibility to and visibility from Interstate 10. Concentration of uses along these roadways would increase the likelihood of success for transit centers or other alternative transportation modes. The provision of centralized commercial and employment center areas and adjacent higher density residential areas would allow opportunities for decreased commute times and provide residents with a wide range of employment options. Conservation and Open Space Resources - The Western Coachella Valley area is characterized by a vast network of natural open space with tremendous habitat, rural and scenic value for both local residents and the region at large. With over three -fourths of the land designated for open space uses, Alternative 3 seeks to preserve this unique natural setting while The Riverside County Integrated Project is jointly sponsored by the County of Riverside, the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Southern Cal iornia Assoclafion of Governments. Riverside County Integrated Project - 1746 Spruce Street ct Riverside, California 92507 minimizing the impacts of encroaching urban uses. Areas identified as "Existing Conservation Areas" in the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation and Natural Communities Conservation Plan are identified as Open Space - Conservation Habitat. The preservation of most of the remote areas of Western Coachella Valley as Open Space or Rural uses accomplishes many objectives. These areas serve as natural boundaries between unincorporated communities, protect sensitive habitat areas, limit susceptibility to natural hazards, and serve as tremendous visual and passive recreational amenities. Air Quality - Alternative 3 proposes compact forms of development and centralized commercial and employment centers, thus providing a mix of networked, localized uses that may reduce both the number and length of vehicle trips throughout the planning area. This alternative also establishes land use patterns that stimulate and support some form of transit service. While unlikely to make an immediate impact, these strategies, in conjunction with similar efforts throughout Riverside County and the region, and along with greater technological advancements, can lead to better air quality in the future. Jobs and Economy - Alternative 3 contains an abundant amount of commercial and industrial designated land to accommodate employment growth in the unincorporated Coachella Valley. These areas would provide residents with abundant employment opportunities. A variety of residential neighborhoods in close proximity to these employment centers assures a healthy mix of jobs and housing. The provision of quality residential neighborhoods, an efficient transportation network, adequate public facilities, and an extensive open space network will enhance the image of Western Coachella Valley as an attractive place for companies and residents to locate. Educational System - With the anticipated population and amount of residential acreage proposed under Alternative 3, quality educational facilities will be a necessary component to assuring a quality urban environment. Though the Area Plans do not specifically propose sites for future schools or educational facilities, the General Plan may address policies related to adequate phasing of schools and other public facilities and provide guidelines that address the integration of schools into the neighborhood fabric. Plan Integration — The Vision Alternative seeks to incorporate the three major components of the RCIP integration efforts; transportation, open space/habitat and land use planning. Though the Vision Alternative does not currently incorporate the ongoing efforts of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation and Natural Communities Conservation Plan, it does designate existing public reserve areas for habitat conservation. Alternative 3 also encourages centralized, compact development along major transportation routes, taking advantage of proposed roadway capacities and increasing land use efficiency; and promotes communities with distinct edges of Open Space and Rural uses. Agricultural Lands - In all three alternatives, only 20 acres are designated as Agriculture for the entire Western Coachella Valley. Limited agriculture uses are permitted however in the Rural Residential, Mountainous and Desert designations. nu, Rrvoame Couniv Integrated Projert is tolntly sponsored by the County of Riverside the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Southern Caliiornia Mvuu aeon of Governments RiversideCounty Integrated Project - 1746 Spruce Street - Riverside, California 92507 Yuy� E Q� C'Pl a> ®o ¢�ci�cs fld � c Q \ / G �2 d � g � c � . CD G .l \ 2\ \�) G � y ■ 3m+3mmm; G#m3mi3E; {(g# /!g!- ,5i ?G D Gg = ! \� < / \ - F- \ \ �) \ = z w /! F .\ � >' © \ & � c : � c � I \ : O \ �