Loading...
2001 02 27 PCPlanning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-quinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION v. 9 V A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California February 27, 2001 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2001-017 Beginning Minute Motion 2001-004 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 February 13, 2001, B. Department Report V. PRESENTATIONS: None PC/AGENDA > U J C c VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Item ................... TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30056 Applicant........... Keith International, Inc. for Chapman Golf Development LLC Location............ The south terminus of Washington Street within the Tradition Club taking access from Del Gato Drive Request ............. Certification of an Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and the subdivision of 5.39 acres into 13 residential lots. Action ............... Resolution 2001- Resolution 2001- B. Item ................... ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-075, CHANGE OF ZONE 2001-067, SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051, VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007 AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30043 Applicant........... KSL Development Corporation Location............ The northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico. Request ............. Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; change lands currently designated as Medium High Density Residential to Village Commercial, and review design guidelines and development standards for a commercial/ office, distribution center and 227 whole ownership single family dwellings with the leasing potential of 365 guest rooms; review of development plans for the residential and office buildings; and the subdivision of 33 acres into 16 numbered and 17 lettered lots. Action ............... Resolution 2001- , Resolution 2001- Resolution 2001- , Resolution 2001- Resolution 2001- Resolution 2001 C. Item ................... ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 89-110 AND TRACT MAP 24230, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant........... The Spanos Company Location............ East side of Washington Street, north of Avenue 48. Request ............. Certification of an Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and the creation of a left turn access from Washington Street onto Lake La Quinta Drive Action ............... Resolution 2001-, Resolution 2001- PC/AGENDA I'll- U U ri. D. Item ................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-692 Applicant........... Cliff House Development LLC Location............ 78-250 Highway 111 Request ............. Addition of 32 tandem parking spaces to the existing parking lot for a restaurant. Action ............... Resolution 2001- E. Item ................... SIGN APPROVAL 2001-536 Applicant........... M & H Realty Partners Location............ Southwest corner of Washington Street and Highway 111, within Plaza La Quinta Request ............. An amendment to a sign program for commercial pad buildings. Action ............... Resolution 2001- VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Discussion regarding a joint meeting between the City Council and Planning Commission on March 7, 2001. B. Commissioner discussion regarding City Council meeting of February 20, 2001. 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 February 13, 2001 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 Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez, Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: A. Staff stated a request had been received from Sprint PCS Wireless to have their item heard last on the agenda. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abets to reorganize the agenda making Public Hearing "B" item "E" and moving all other forward respectively. Unanimously approved. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of January 23, 2001. Commissioner Kirk asked that Page 9, Item 15 be corrected to read, "...and landscaping, all oriented around the vehicles.", "...Staff suggested lowering the height 15-20....", and "...in the context of what we are trying to achieve in the Village."; Page 1 1 , Item 23 amended to read "Commissioner Kirk seconded the motion for purposes of discussion.". Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 15, Item 2 be amended to read, "...if the temporary Lube Shop board sign had been approved." There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved as corrected. B. Department Report: None. (�II1x G:\WPDOCS\PC 2-13-01 .wod 1 Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2001 V. PRESENTATIONS: None. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Environmental Assessment 2001-401 and Conditional Use Permit 2001- 054; a request of Nextel Communications for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and approval to install a wireless communication antenna with Monopalm prototype design Tree and related equipment for cellular -telephone service in a 200 square foot one story building to be located at 77-856 Avenida Montezuma (Frances Hack Park). 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Staff requested this item be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of March 13, 2001, as requested by the applicant. 2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abets to continue this item to March 27, 2001. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2001-689; a request of Ashbrook Communities for review of architectural and landscaping plans for three new prototype residential units with two facades each located at the northeast corner of Black Diamond and Avenue 58 in Tract 29147-2 in PGA West. 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 Butler stated his confusion about whether or not Plan 3 would have the fourth bedroom requiring a three car garage. Staff stated this would be reviewed during the plan check process. As of now it is an option. 3. Commissioner Tyler asked if this was a compatibility review. Staff stated per our Ordinance it is a compatibility review. Discussion followed regarding the compatibility process. 4. Commissioner Kirk asked if the compatibility review process was for a specific plan or subdivision. Staff stated it could be both. G:\wPDOCS\PC 2-13-01 .wpd 2 005 Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2001 5. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to elaborate on the changes requested by the Architectural and Landscaping Committee (ALRC) regarding the roof plan. Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated the ALRC requested a deviation to the elevations so they did not appear to have the same front roof elevation and the applicant suggested using a gable roof over the garage. They determined that Plan B would have gable roofs. 6. Commissioner Tyler stated the ALRC requested changes to the plant pallette as well, and he did not see a condition requiring this to be done. Staff noted it was to be handled by the HOA. 7. Commissioner Kirk asked about Item 4 under compatibility review, where it states "requires lush landscaping"; what requires this? Staff stated the Specific Plan requires it. Commissioner Kirk asked if this could be changed. 8. Chairman Robbins stated he would like to see the landscaping as it appears in the drawings. 9. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Richard Krook, President of Ashbrook Communities, stated they have met with staff and agrees with staff's recommendations. 10. Commissioner Butler asked if the applicant had any drawings of their original design as he agrees the original design did offer a lot of deviation. Mr. Krook stated he could give the variation but would prefer to have the original roof design. 1 1 . Commissioner Butler asked if the lush landscaping was required by PGA West. Mr. David Know, landscape architect for the project, stated PGA West has its own landscape plant palette and that is what they are required to use. 12. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment on this project. There being no further public comment, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation portion of the hearing and asked if there was any Commission discussion. 13. Commissioner Kirk stated he would like staff to look at the applicability of compatibility. Also, the roof lines may not seem varied, but when combined with the other architectural elements, there is a variety. He would concur with striking this condition. G:\WPDOCS\PC2-13-01.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2001 14. Chairman Robbins asked if the City Council could deny the applicant's request for lush landscaping and if so, could it then be changed. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated it would have to be renoticed as an amendment to the specific plan. 15. Commissioner Kirk noted that other tracts in PGA West do not have such lush landscaping. He suggested adding a condition to require the applicant to work with staff for the lush, but water efficient landscaping. 16. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Butler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-012 approving Site Development Permit 2001-689, as amended: a. Condition #: 3.c. deleted b. New Condition #8: The landscape plan shall meet the Water Efficiency Ordinance within the confines of the Specific Plan for PGA West. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Chairman Robbins. ABSTAIN: None. Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and NOES: None. ABSENT: None. C. Village Use Permit 2000-006; a request of Desert Sage II, LLC for review of exterior remodeling plans of existing restaurant and landscaping plans for a new parking lot to be located at 78-085 Avenida La Fonda. 1. Commissioner Kirk excused himself due to a possible conflict of interest and withdrew from the dias. 2. 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. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Abels asked if the parking complied with what is required. Staff noted an analysis was not prepared as this is not required for the use to operate, but was supplemental. G:\WPDOCS\PC2-1 3-0 1.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2001 4. Commissioner Tyler questioned the number of lots. Staff is showing nine lots and the applicant shows eight. What is the status of Lot 2. Staff stated it is an error on staff's attachment. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to explain the changes to the parking lot. Staff went over the proposed changes on the plan and discussion followed regarding the circulation pattern. 5. Chairman Robbins noted he thought the alley would be used as part of circulation pattern and asked if the pole and guy wire would be removed. 6. Commissioner Tyler stated the driveway on the east is right in only. Staff suggested the applicant answer these questions. 7. Chairman Robbins asked if there was a condition that requires the restaurant to hook up to the sewer. Staff stated there was no condition requiring this. Chairman Robbins asked that they be conditioned to do so. Staff noted they would add the condition. 8. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Michael Allen, California Infrastructure, acting on behalf of the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. 9. Commissioner Butler asked that the applicant explain the circulation pattern. Mr. Allen explained that La Fonda is a one way street and the valets would be directing the circulation on site. 10. Chairman Robbins asked about the staff's recommendation. Mr. Allen stated the pole and guy wire would be removed so they could use the alley for a turnaround. Staff had no objections. Mr. Allen stated that in regard to sewer hook up, they intend to hook up to the sewer. Mr. Jurgen Branner, general manager, explained the operation of the restaurant. 1 1 . Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 12. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-013, Village Use Permit 2001-006, as amended. G:\WPDOCS\PC:2-1 3-0 1.wpd 5 „_ ()( Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2001 a. Condition 25:b. The easternmost access off Avenida La Fonda shall be right in and right out. b. Condition #35: add "Unless the power pole and guy wire adjacent to the westerly driveway to the alley is relocated or removed pursuant to Condition #17". ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. Commissioner Kirk rejoined the Commission. D. Site Development Permit 2000-688; a request of Madison Development, LLC for review of development plans for two retail buildings at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Washington Street. 1 . Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler noted clerical changes on the Resolution and stated 90% of the conditions contained in the resolution are also in the Specific Plan; why does this need to be repeated. Staff stated each site development permit comes in under a different developer and the conditions are needed to ensure each developer complies with the specific plan conditions. 3. Commissioner Butler commended staff on their presentation. 4. Chairman Robbins stated he was confused between the south elevation and the roof plan for Building 5; the wall on the south elevation with the trellis seem to not agree. Staff explained the plans as to how the trellis connects to the other building. 5. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Rick Wilkins, representing the applicant, stated he concurs with staff's recommendations. G:AWPD0CSVPC2-13-01 .wpd 6 4 - ri U 9 Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2001 6. Commissioner Abels asked if they had signed any tenants. Mr. Wilkins stated Building #4 would have Tarbel Realty, Falls Steak House, Madison Development offices, with Las Casuales Nuevas Restaurant on the corner parcel. 7. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment on this project. 8. There being no further public comment, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation portion of the hearing and asked if there was any Commission discussion. 9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-014 approving Site Development Permit 2000-688, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Chairman Robbins. ABSTAIN: None. Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and NOES: None. ABSENT: None. E. Environmental Assessment 2000-409 and Conditional Use Permit 2000- 055, a request of Sprint PCS Wireless for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and approval to install a 65 foot high wireless antenna with Monopalm prototype design and related roof and ground mounted equipment for cellular telephone service to be located at 49-499 Eisenhower Drive behind the La Quinta Hotel Administration Offices. 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. Staff passed out a letter that had been received from Mr. & Mrs. Puget prior to the meeting. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Butler noted another monopalm had just been approved. Staff indicated the sites where other monopalms had been approved. Commissioner Butler stated that with each phone company wanting its own pole, there could be a proliferation of poles. Is there any condition requiring them to remove it if they become obsolete. Staff stated no. G:\WPD0C5\PC2-13-01.wpd 7 4. (� Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2001 3. Commissioner Tyler stated the information before them states the height at 65 feet and yet it goes ten feet higher with the palm tree leaves. 4. Commissioner Kirk stated the equipment on the roof peaks over the top. Staff stated that was true and a condition had been added requiring it to be painted. Commissioner Kirk stated he would like to have the equipment below the roof line. 5. Chairman Robbins asked if the monopalm for the school was this height. Staff stated no it was not. 6. Commissioner Tyler asked if this public hearing was duly noticed as noted in the letter by Mr. Davis. Staff stated it was and the letters received are from property owners on the north side of Avenida Fernando. 7. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. David Leonard, representing Sprint PCS Wireless, stated this site was the culmination of their investigation as to where to place a pole in this area. He explained the height was needed to reach the signal of the nearest pole outside the area. The demand has been increasing at the Hotel for cell service. In regard to the equipment, it appears that from the roofline to the highest point of the equipment box, it is ten feet and the parapet is seven feet for a differential of three feet. Upon doing a site review it did not appear the equipment could be seen by anyone on the ground. However, they could move the equipment, or paint it to hide the equipment. 8. Commissioner Butler stated the other cell service companies will also want to have their own poles. He questioned why this monopalm could not be put out on the golf course. Mr. Leonard stated that due to the layout of the Hotel and shadowing, it would not cover the area needed. There are areas where hillsides provide shadows to prevent coverage. The original proposal was to incorporate the towers into the buildings themselves. This did not work because the buildings were not strong enough to hold the equipment. 9. Commissioner Tyler asked what would happen if it was 60 feet Mr. Leonard stated the height is determined by site tests. Commissioner Tyler stated his concern about the roof mounted equipment and he would like it to be hidden below the parapet. G:\WPDOCS\PC2-1 3-0 1.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2001 10. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. Steve Davis, 77-500 Avenida Fernando, stated he lived right across the street from the Hotel, and he is at a disadvantage in regard to whether or not the monopalm would be visible from his property and whether or not it will make any noise. He is concerned that he was not been notified earlier of the proposed tower. 1 1. Mr. Bubba Lloyd, Mazatlan, stated there had been some concern by the residents in Santa Rosa Cove as to the location of this monopalm but they now believe this is the best site possible. His concern is that there may be more poles for each of the different companies. 12. Commissioner Tyler asked about the possibility of a location that would accommodate multiple carriers. Mr. Leonard stated the technology of the various companies is so different that it makes it impossible to combine them. This is far from the first site they looked at. 13. There being no further public comment, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the hearing to Commission discussion. Q 14. Commissioner Tyler stated that due to the Communications Act, the City probably does not have much choice. He would like to have a condition added to require that the equipment on the roof be completely hidden. 15. Commissioner Butler questioned the health hazards. Mr. Leonard stated there is no proven evidence that the poles cause any health hazards. 16. Commissioner Kirk stated he supports the proposal in its location. 17. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abets to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-015, recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2000-409. 18. Chairman Robbins stated his concern regarding the proliferation of towers. G:\WPDOCS\PC2-13-01.wpd 9 A. (11? Planning Commission Minutes February 13, 2001 19. Commissioner Abels stated that since the advent of the cell phones there have been several dead spots in the Cove and he supports the project. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Chairman Robbins. ABSTAIN: None. Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 20. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abets to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-016, recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2000-055, as amended: a. Condition #8: Prior to issuance of a building permit the height of the equipment shall be reduced so as not to be visible above the mansard roof. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the City Council meeting of February 6, 2001. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held February 27, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:39 p.m. on February 13, 2001. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Q.uinta, California G\WPD0CSVPC2-13-01.wpd 10 'A0 'J i� February 26, 2001 Fred Baker, AICP Principal Planner City of La Quinta Planning Commission 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Baker, Please accept this letter as our request to continue our participation on the calendar at the public hearing scheduled for tomorrow night, Feb. 27, 2001, regarding the final approval of Tentative Tract Map 30056 in Tradition Golf Club. We are requesting the continuance to give us more time to present our plans to the current members of our dub. We woul like the above referenced map to be added to the calendar for the last meeting in March 2 , 11001. Tha�k ou for your co eration. i j V � t ul�ours David Chapman President Tradition Chub Associates r Srr,r 561-?.72 lti 3;55 fl 1 PH #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2001 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30056 REQUEST: SUBDIVIDE 5.39 ACRES (SEVEN RESIDENTIAL LOTS) INTO 13 RESIDENTIAL LOTS APPLICANT: THE KEITH COMPANIES PROPERTY OWNERS: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT L.L.C. LOCATION: AT THE SOUTH TERMINUS OF WASHINGTON STREET WITHIN THE TRADITION CLUB TAKING ACCESS FROM DEL GATO DRIVE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (EA 96-333). THE ADDENDUM HAS DETERMINED THAT THE NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN IMPACT WILL RESULT FROM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT. PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, SECTION 15162 NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS DEEMED NECESSARY. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) (LDR) SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES: NORTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) SOUTH : OPEN SPACE (OS) EAST: OPEN SPACE (OS) WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) ,.� 015 BACKGROUND: The land encompassing Tentative Tract Map 30056 was approved by the City Council in 19198 as a portion of Tract 28867. The portion of the Tract proposed to be re -subdivided consists of seven single family lots on 5.39 acres, taking access from Del Gato Drive. The re -subdivided portion proposes thirteen lots adding six residential lots which of which the total allowed units within the Tradition Club of 595 lots in the Low Density Residential Zone is not exceeded by this proposal. This Tract proposes 13 lots on 5.39 acres. All residential lots are proposed to have driveway access from a new dual cul-de-sac private street (Lot A)• The new configuration eliminates steep driveway access from Del Gato Drive and adds six new lots to this enclave area. Lot sizes range from 11,455 to 19,352 square feet. Lot "B" is proposed to be a landscaped lot. An existing 20 foot landscape easement adjacent to Lot "B" and running along the south edge of the property abuts this proposed Tract. A homeowners' association, previously formed, maintains retention basins, common landscaped areas, private roads, and perimeter landscaping. The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on February 16, 2001 . All property owners within 500-feet of the affected area were mailed a copy of the public notice as required; and all property owners within the Tradition Club were mailed a copy of the public notice. Attached is a letter from a property owner within the Tradition Club requesting this application be rejected (Attachment 3). - T1�1L1R�1 The Tentative Tract was sent out for comments to City Departments and affected public agencies on February 2, 2001 Agency comments received have been made a part of the Conditions of Approval. An EA Addendum to the previously certified Environmental Assessment (EA) 96-333, has been completed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in order to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with minor changes. The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that based on this Addendum to the previously certified Negative Declaration, no further environmental review is deemed necessary, pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15162. I.J6 (11ro The findings necessary to approve the Tentative Tract can be made per the General Plan, the Subdivision Ordinance, and Zoning Code as noted in the attached resolution. There are no issues. RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City Council certification of Addendum to Environmental Assessment 96-333 for Tentative Tract 30056; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 30056 subject to the attached conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Tentative Tract Map 30056 3. Letter(s) received Prepared by: L---- Fred Baker, AICP Principal Planner Submitted by: Christine di orio Planning Manager U17 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-333 PREPARED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30056 CASE NO: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-333 APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 271h day of February , 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 96-333 for Tentative Tract Map 30056; 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 Addendum to Environmental Assessment 96-333 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164; and, WHEREAS, the Revised Project does not call for the preparation of a subsequent EA pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15162 or Public Resources Code Section 21166, in that the Revised Project does not involve: (1) substantial changes to the project analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration which would involve new significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; or (3) new information of substantial importance which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. WHEREAS, on April 1, 1997, the La Quinta City Council certified the EA for Tract 28867 (Resolution 97-26) encompassing 148.64 acres, which allowed for 241 single family residential houses and golf course use. WHEREAS, the Revised Project involves six additional residential units of which the total allowed units of 595 in this Low Density Residential Zone for the Project area is not exceeded by this Revised Project. 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 certification of said Addendum: A:\TT30056\PC RESO EA 96-333.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Environmental Assessment 96-333 February 27, 2001 1. The proposed Tentative Tract will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, as the project in question will not be developed in any manner inconsistent with the General Plan and other current City standards. The project does not have the potential to eliminate an important example of California prehistory, as extensive archaeological investigations of the site have been conducted as part of the project to implement appropriate mitigation alternatives. 2. The proposed Tentative Tract will not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, in that the proposed project is undertaken pursuant to a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been certified. 3. The proposed Tentative Tract will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, as the project conteimplates no more single family residences at a than those already assessed under ultimate development in this Low Density Residential Zone, and previously addressed in the certified Mitigated Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Addendum to Environmental Assessment 96-333. 2. That it does hereby recommend certification of an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 96-333 in that the changes proposed to the project are a minor nature and do not require the preparation of a subsequent Environmental Assessment pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21 166 and there are no new circumstances which would require the preparation of a subsequent EA and there is no new information or change in circumstances which would require the preparation of a subsequent EA. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 271h day of February, 2001, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: A:\TT30056\PC RESO EA 96-333.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Environmental Assessment 96-333 February 27, 2001 ABSTAIN: ABSENT: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California ,A"- UGIJ A:\TT30056\PC RESO EA 96-333.wpd ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-333 FOR TRADITION CLUB CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT L.L.C. (CEQA GUIDELINE 15164) TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30056 A:ATT30056\EA Addendum 1. 96-333.wpd 0. j o, U G 3 The City of La Quinta, as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq. ("CEQA") has prepared this Addendum pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15164. This is an Addendum to the Environmental Assessment 96-333 that the City prepared and certified in 1997 for Tract 28867. The City Council certified the EA on April 1, 1997, under Resolution No. 97-26. The purpose of this Addendum is to document certain changes to the project which will be implemented through the following land use approvals: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 300567 This is referred to as "the Revised Project." The Revised Project involves only 5.39 acres of the overall 141.64 acres within the project area. The 5.39 acres are located at the south terminus of Washington Street within the Tradition Club taking access from Del Gato Drive. The 5.39 acres border existing residential development and open space. The City has determined that the proposed residential development of this 5.39 acre site will be consistent with the density and character of the adjacent residential development, and will be consistent with the goalls, policies, and objectives of the City's General Plan and Tentative Tract 28470, as amended. Tract 28867 which allowed for 241 single family residential houses and golf course use. The Revised Project involves the subdivision of seven residential lots into thirteen residential lots with Low Density Residential Zoning (LDR). Under LDR Zoning the Project could achieve 595 residential lots on 148.64 acres within the Tradition Club. With the additional six residential lots, no significant change in impacts will result in the areas of air quality, noise, population generation, use of natural and energy resources, traffic, public facility and services demand, and cumulative impacts. The City has compared the impacts of the Revised analyzed in the EA and finds as follows: Aesthetics - Impacts no Hazards and Hazardous greater than those Materials - Impacts no previouslly analyzed. greater than those The previously approved previously analyzed. No residential development hazardous materials will will be replaced. The be maintained within the scale, height, and visual 3.59 acre site. impact of grading will all be reduced within this area as compared with the original project. Project with those impacts Public Services - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Since the number of residential units is below the total allowed units in this zoning category there will be the same demands for public services. A:\TT30056\EA Addendum 1. 96-333.wpd 1122 Agriculture Resources - Not applicable. Air Quality -Impacts Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Since the number of residential units that could be achieved is below the total allowed units in this zoning category. Biological Resources Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The Revised Project will have the same level of impacts on biology as the original project analyzed in the EA. Cultural Resources - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Geology and Soils - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The geology and soil impacts remain unchanged. Hydrology and Water Quality - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Land Use Planning - impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The Revised Project is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the General Plan, and Zoning Code. Mineral Resources- Not applicable. Noise - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Recreation - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Since the number of residential units is below the total allowed units in this zoning category the need for recreational facilities arising from the project are within the scope of what was originally analyzed. Transportation/Traffic- Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Since the total number of residential units approved for this project is below the total allowed units in this zoning category. Utilities and Service Systems - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Since the number of residential units is below the total allowed units in this zoning category Population and Housing Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. A:\TT30056\EA Addendum 1. 96-333.wpd The City finds that consideration of the Revised Project does not call for the preparation of a subsequent EA pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15162 or Public Resources Code Section 21166, in that the Revised Project does not involve: (1) substantial changes to the project analyzed in the EA and the amended EA which would involve: new significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the EA and Amended EA substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; or (3) new information of substantial importance which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the EA substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. U2 a A:\TT30056\EA Addendum 1. 96-333.wpd ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Environmental Assessment No. 96-333 Case No.: TT 28470 Date: January 7, 1997 CZ 96-081 CUP 96-031 SDP 96-599 COA 96-001 I. Name of Proponent: Tradition Club Associates. LLC Address: 78-150 Calle Tampico La Ouinta Phone:619-564-7009 Agency Requiring Checklist: City of La Ouinta - Project Name (if applicable): Tradition CITY OF LA QUINTA Community Development Department 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 EM28470 025 II. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. X Land Use and Planning X Transponation/Circulanon X Public Services Population and Housing X Biological Resources X Utilities X Eanh Resources Energy and Mineral Resources X Aesthetics X Water Risk of Upset and Human Health X Cultural Resources X Air Qualiry X Noise X Recreation X Mandatory Findings of Significance III. DETERMINATION. On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the X project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least, 1) one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards; and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a " potentially significant impact" or "potential significant unless Mitigated. "AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. �— Date — 7 -1 % Signatur Printed N, me and Title Leslie Mourinuand Associate Planner For: __Chy of La OuintaCommunity Development Department 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. PawY11Y Paeni�IlY SiNifm Siyiifw+n Isr rlw UNu. Sianifwia Ne Impart MItiS>mC Impart Inpn LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? X (source #(s): b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the X project? G) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from X incompatible land uses)? d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or X minority community)? POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional- or local X population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped X area or extension of major infrastructure)? C) Displace existing housing, especially affordable X housing? EARTH AND GEOLOGY. Would the project result in or expose people to potentinl iwpncts invol"'": X a) Fault rupture? X b) Seismic ground shaking c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction'? X d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e) Landslides or mudflows? X Erosion, changes in topography or unstable sod X conditions from excavation, grading or fill? X g) Subsidence of the land'? X h) Expansive soils? i) Unique Geologic or physical features? X X U a. Polenuilly - Po�enuiYy Si�nuLGani lea Thin $it(IY11[NI UIIIN SIGIYtIt]111 TpiGI HM8i1GG ITQiC, 3.4. WATER. Would the project result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the X rate and amount of surface runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related X hazards such as flooding? . c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved X oxygen or turbidity? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water X body'? e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of X water movements? f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge X capability'? g) Altered direction or rate of glow of groundwater? X h) Impacts to groundwater quality? X 3.5. AIR, QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any air quality standard to contribute to an existing or projected air quality violations''? X b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? X c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or X cause any change in climate'? d) Crean ohjectional odors? X 0 u 3.6. TRANSIPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project result in: PoimuaJv Pmmually tiip�uunln Lm Thin SlrmYcani UN¢u Sipu4Wm NV enpaa Um¢ama Impel Imps a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? x b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible x uses (e.g. farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby x uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on site or off site? - x e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? x f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative x transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts'? x 3.7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project result in irppactr to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? x b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? x c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak x forest, (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? PamYaUy PQIMU9 y SipY4cvlt Lm lrun S,P G, II UW. Siplt4ant NY t.,.v Mwp.d Inpat Un .t d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal X pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X 3.8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project. a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? X 3.9. RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health X hazards? d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential X health hazards? e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush. grass, or trees? X 3.10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? X b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 3.11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in mty of the fallowing areas: a) Fire protection. 1 v ,'1 0 Police protection? Schools? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? Other governmental services? FELITIES. ould the proposal result in a need for new aysrentx, or bstantial alternations to the following utilities: Power or natural gas'? Communications systems? Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste disposal? ESTHETICS. Would the proposal: Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? I Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? Create light or glare? PmenP>u, Pot.U, SiPruGcant L. thn $IPNYCYI� UNev Sipafinm No Impact MmpmcE Impact Imps ULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: Disturb paleontological resources'? I Disturb archaeological resources? Affect historical resources? Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Restrict existing religious of sacred uses within the potential impact area'? it X X X X X X X X X X O U t i VI V PommallY PmmuallY Sipuueans Lens Than Ag�uficvn UNea Sigm4wa Yu in,w<� nvugawe in,wn in,w<a 3.15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks of other recreational facilities'? X b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? X 4. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the Potential to degrade the quality of the environmental, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the ranee of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California X history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term. to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental X 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 projects, and the effects of X probable future projects). d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human X beings, either directly or indirectly? EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may he used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which elfects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document. c) D1itigntion measures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." describe the mitigation treasures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. p Vtt INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-333 Tradition Project: Tentative Tract Map 28470 Conditional Use Permit 96-031 Change of Zone 96-081 Site Development Permit 96-599 Certificate of Appropriateness 96-001 Applicant: Tradition Club Associates. LLC 78-150 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Prepared bv: City of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta. CA 92253 Leslie Mouriquand, Associate Planner January 24, 1997 0 Ci TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 2 3 Page INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 Project Overview 3 1.2, Purpose of Initial Study 3 1.3 Background of Environmental Review 4 1.z4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review 4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4 2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting 4 2.2 Physical Characteristics 5 2.3 Operational Characteristics 5 2.4 Objectives 5 5 2.5 Discretionary Actions 2.6 Related Projects 6 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 6 3.1 Land Use and Planning 6 3.2 Population and Housing 9 3.3 Earth Resources 11 3.4 Water 18 23 3.5 Air Quality ''-7 :i.6 Transportation/ Circulation 3.7 Biological Resources 30 3.8 Energy and Mineral Resources 33 3.9 Risk of Upset/Human Health 34 3.10 Noise 35 '� 3.11 Public Services 39 3.12 Utilities 41 3.13 Aesthetics 43 3.14 Cultural Resources 46 3.15 Recreation 4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 46 5 EARLIER ANALYSES 47 2 0 • SECTION l: INTRODUCTION LI PROJECT OVERVIEW The purpose of this Initial Studv is to identify the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Tentative Tract Map 23470 to subdivide 746.6 acres into 241 single family lots, a golf course lot, private street lots, and 2 other lots. In addition, there is a request for a change of zone from the existing RL (Low Density Residential) to GC (Golf Course) for a portion of the proposed golf course, and a request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the creation of six residential lots and golf tee boxes in the Hillside Conservation Zoning District. Finally, there is a request for approval of the architectural designs for a clubhouse, maintenance building, cart barn, and half -way house to service the golf course. The existing historic hacienda will be rehabilitated for use as administrative and sales offices for the project. The project site is located on Avenue 52, at the southern terminus of Washington Street, in La Quinta. California. The property is the historic estate known as the Marshall Ranch. The historic property is known as the Hacienda del Gato, which is listed on the State Historic Resources Inventory. Formerly the property had been ranched with dates and citrus. Several out -buildings and a workers house are also located on the property. The Applicant proposes to develop the estate into a private country club with golf course and custom home sites, and an administrative/sales center. The City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency for the project review, as defined by Section 21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Lead Agency is the public agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which rnav have a significant effect upon the environment. The City of La Quinta, as the Lead Agency, has the authority to oversee the environmental review and to approve the land use designations. 1.2 PURPOSE OF INITIAL STUDY As part of the environmental review for the proposed Tentative Tract Map, Change of Zone, Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit, the City of La Quinta Community Development Department staff has prepared this Initial Study. This document provides a basis for determining the nature and scope of the subsequent environmental review for the proposed subdivision and future development of the land. The purposes of the initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, include the following: To provide the Agencv with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the tentative tract map, zone change, and development applications: 3 0 9 To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the project. mitigating adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; To assist the preparation of an EIR, should one be required, by focusing the analysis on those issues that will be adversely impacted by the proposed project, To facilitate environmental review early in the design of the project; To provide documentation for the findings in a Negative Declaration that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment To eliminate unnecessary EIR's, and, To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. 1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed project applications were deemed subject to the environmental review requirements of CEQA in light of the intended development and potential impacts upon the property and surrounding area. This Initial Study Checklist and Addendum was prepared for review by the City of La Quinta Historic Preservation Commission, Planning Commission and certification by the City Council. 1.4 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This Initial Study indicates that there is a potential for adverse environmental impacts for some of the issue areas contained in the Environmental Checklist (Earth Resources, Water. Noise. Public Services. Utilities, Aesthetics, Cultural Resources). Mitigation measures have been recommended for the proposed subdivision and related development applications which will reduce potential impacts to insignificant levels. As a result. A Mitigated. Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project. An EIR will not be necessary. SECTION 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The City of La Quinta is a 31.18 square mile municipality located in the southwestern portion of the Coachella Valley, in Riverside County. California. The City is bounded on the west by the City of Indian Wells, on the east by the Citv of Indio and Riverside County, on the north by Riverside County, and federal lands to the south. The City of La Quinta was incorporated in 1992. 0 • 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed project site is a portion of a 746.6 acre parcel of land. The land involved in this project has been farmed in the historic and recent past. and developed in the 1930's with a lariae home, workers house, and several out -buildings to service the former ranch operation. The property is located adjacent to and within the Coral Reef Mountains, located at, the mouth of the La Quinta Cove area. The proposed development will be largely contained on the flatter alluvial fan area. Six residential lots are proposed at the mouth of an alluvial fan that will require approval of a Conditional Use Permit due to the slope considerations and development restrictions contained in the City's Hillside Development Ordinance. A large area of the property was subjected to mass grading in 1988, by the Coachella Vallev Water District, in conjunction with the East La Quinta Flood Control Master Planned facilities and a previous development project that was not constructed. Thus, a large portion of the project area has been highly disturbed. The agricultural activities on the ranch ceased several years ago in anticipation of proposed development. There are only a few date and citrus trees left, except for those around the cluster of houses and out- buildings. Several eucalyptus trees line the south side of Old Avenue 52 which is located within the project site, and the original driveway leading into the hacienda. 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed tract will create 241 single family custom residential lots for house construction, and for an 18-hole golf course, clubhouse, maintenance building, and cart barn. A circulation system of private streets is proposed to provide access throughout the tract. The development will be a private gated community. Five retention basin are proposed for the project, which will supplement the existing stormwater retention system. The historic mansion will be rehabilitated and used as an administrative/sales center for the country club. 2.4 OBJECTIVES The objiective of the proposed subdivision is to create 241 new single family custom residential lots within a planned private development for profit. These lots will be offered for sale by the applicant. The Applicant proposes to develop an upscale private country club development with an 18-hole golf course. 2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS. A discretionary action is an action taken by a government agencv that calls for the exercise of judgment in deciding whether to approve a project. For this project, the government agencv is the City of La Quinta. The.proposed tentative tract map and future development will require discretionary approval by the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning 0 • Commission, and approval by the City Council. The following discretionary approvals will be required for this project: Certification of the Environmental Assessment 96-333. Certificate of Appropriateness 96-001, Approval of Tentative Tract Map 28470; Approval of the Final Tract Map 28470, Approval of Conditional Use Permit 96-031; Approval of Change of Zone 96-081, Approval of Site Development Permit 96-599 2.6 RELATED PROJECTS The project consists of a proposed tentative tract map, grading plan, various approvals under a Certificate of Appropriateness for the historic structures, a proposed Change of Zone. Conditional Use Permit, and a Site Development Permit. Four previous projects (San Pebbles Country Club, Heritage Club, Crystal Canyon Country Club, and The Tradition at La Quinta) proposed for the project site have been reviewed by the City in the past dozen years. All of the previous proposed projects were resort oriented developments which included a range of 330 to 890 homesites and a golf course. Most of these prior approvals and plans have expired. Environmental studies were prepared for these previous projects. The Coachella Valley Water District graded the project site for construction of retention basin facilities in 1988. In 1985 and 1987, the City approved the vacation of portions of Avenue 52 (now referred to as Old Avenue 52) in order to facilitate future development of the immediate area. A new alignment for Avenue 52 was designed, approved, and constructed by the City that is located adjacent to the northern property line of the project site. SECTION 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the land use, subdivision design, architectural design, and historic architectural approval of the proposed development. The CEQA Checklist issue areas are evaluated in this addendum. For each checklist item, the environmental setting is discussed, including a description of the existing conditions within the City and the areas affected by the proposed project. Thresholds of significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies, or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G). 3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING Regional Environmenral .Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, in the eastern portion of Riverside County. The valley is abundant with both desert plant and animal life. The 0 9 topographical relief ranges from -237 feet below mean sea level (msl) to about 2,000 feet above msl. The vatlev is a part of the Colorado Desert region. Surrounding the valley are the San Jacinto Mountains, the Santa Rosa Mountains. the Orocopia Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountains. The San Andreas fault transects the northeastern edge of the valley. Local Enxironmenral &tting The proposed project is located at the southern terminus of Washington Street, at Avenue 52, east of Avenida Bermudas. The land is partially vacant cove property that has been farmed in the past, and partially developed with a clustering of two houses and two out- buildings. The southern end of the property is dry and sparsely vegetated with some natural desert vegetation. Relic trees from the past agricultural use are located near the existing structures at the north -central portion of the property. Previous grading activity has disturbed a large portion of the property. A. Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning.' Potential Impact Unless Mitigated. In 1992. a portion of the property was rezoned from R-1-10.000 and R-2-20,000 to R-2, and from Hillside Conservation (HQ to R-2 through realignment of the R-2 to the toe of the slope. Those areas above the toe of the slope remain HC zone. The toe of slope is determined according to the criteria in the Zoning Ordinance. to 1996. through a city-wide Zoning Ordinance Update. -the R-2 designation was reclassified as RL (Low Density Residential District), and the HC to Open Space (OS). That area included in the flood and drainage facilities on -site is designated as FP (Flood Plain District) on the City's Zoning Map, and W (Watercourse) on the General Plan. The La Quinta General Plan requires that golf courses be designated with the special golf course (GC) zoning district. The applicant has submitted a request for a Change of Zone from RL. to GC Golf Course District for that portion of the proposed golf course not in the FP designated area. This application will be processed concurrently with the tentative map application. The change of zone will serve as mitigation for land use designation compliance. Adjacent land uses and their designations consist of new Avenue 52 along the not -them boundary, with scattered residential north of that, cove residential to the west, vacant natural areas and flood control facilities to the south, and ranch properties and steep hillsides to the east. At the northwest corner is a City park and a fire station. The adjacent land use designations and zoning districts consist of RC (Cove Residential) to the west, OS (Open Space) to the south and southeast. RL (Low Density Residential) to the east and north. MC (Major Community Facilities) and PR (Parks and Recreation) to the northwest. These adjacent land uses and designations are compatible with the proposed land use of this project. The proposed development in the hillside alluvial fan areas is demonstrated that those areas meet certain criteria contained in the Zoning Ordinance 7 .. pertaining to development on slopes. Those residential lots that encroach into slopes 20& or greater will be required to have conservation easements dedicated to the City in )erpetuity to ensure that those areas remain in open space. 8. Would the project conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The City of La Quinta has jurisdiction over :his project. The primary environmental plans and policies pertinent to this project are identified in La Quinta's General Plan, the General Plan EIR, the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment, and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project includes development of a golf course tee box (917), holes 92 and 18, and six residential lot sites (Lots 230 through 236) located apparently above the toe of slope. These areas are within the Hillside Conservation Zoning District. The exact line of demarcation between the PL and H-C Zoning Districts according to the criteria in the Zoning Ordinance through the preparation of a detailed slope analysis. A slope analysis for the six residential lot area that depicts the toe of the slope, and the various slope gradients within the limits of proposed grading. The slope gradient was differentiated into 0% - 10% slope, 10.0% - 12.4% slope, 12.5% - 14.9% slope, 15.0% - 17.4% slope, 17.5% - 19.9% slope, and 20% or more slope (Source: Keith International Inc.). Those areas within the 20% or greater slopes will not be permitted to be developed and will require conservation easements dedicated to the City in order to preserve open space. C. Would the project affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to sails or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? No Impact. The La Quinta General Plan does not contain an agricultural land use designation although there are agricultural land uses extant in the south and southeastern portions of the City. Historically, there has been farming activity in several sections of the City, however, that has largely been replaced by resort and residential development over the past 15 years. The property involved in this project has been disturbed by farming activities since 1902, and periodic flood events. Active farming of the property ceased several years ago in anticipation of development. There are only relic farming activities adjacent to the east of the project site. The historic ranch located adjacent to the east is not currently under cultivation. Thus, no impact on any agricultural resources or operations in the immediate area is likely to result from the proposed subdivision (La Quinta General Plan. Site Survey). • 0 D. Would the project disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income minority community)? No Impact. The project site will be developed with single family lots for general market sale. A private clubhouse and 271 acre I8-hole golf course will be developed, along with a clubhouse. maintenance building, can barn, and a half -way house. The half -way house is a structure rnid-way in the golf course that will have a snack bar and restrooms. Residential land uses are located in all directions of the project site, except for the mountains adjacent to the east and southeast, and the south where there are flood control dams, retention basins. etc.. The future development of these lots will not disrupt or divide the community. The proposed development will not affect the physical arrangement of the existing neighborhoods (Sources: Site Survey, Proposed Site Plan). The project is proposed to be developed in four phases, with Phase I consisting of the golf course. 3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING Regional Environmental Setting Between 1980 and 1990, the population of La Quinta expanded 125%, as reported by the U.S. Census, making the City the second fastest growing city in the Coachella Valley. During that time period, the number of residents in La Quinta blossomed from 4,992 to 11,215. From 1990 to January of 1996, the population grew from 13,070 to 18,050. These fieures are based upon information provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, the State Department of Finance, and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). La Quinta's population ranks sixth largest of the nine cities in the Coachella Valley. Annual average growth rate has been approximately 10% in recent years. The projected population of La Quinta by the year 2000 is anticipated to be 23,000 (Source: Community Development Department). The average age of a City resident is 32 years. Persons over the age of 45 make up 27% of the City's population (Source: 1990 Census). In addition to permanent residents, La Quinta has approximately 9,300 seasonal residents who spend three to six months in the City. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City .are used by seasonal residents (Source: Community Development Department). The totail housing stock as of 1996, is listed at 9,352 units. Single family units make up 68 percent of the available.housing stock. The housing unit breakdown is as follows: 8,624 detached single family, 481 multi -family units, and 247 mobile homes. The average number of persons per household is 3.15 (Source: Department of Finance 1996). Median home prices in La Quinta are approximately $112,000 which is lower than the average for Riverside County ($120,950), but less than other Southern California counties (Source: La Quinta Economic Overview 1996 Edition). •.. u`R1 4 ® 0 Ethnicity information from the 1990 Census revealed that the composition of La Quinta's population is 70% Caucasian, 26% Hispanic. 2% Afro-American. 1.5% Asian, and 1.0% Native American. The 1990 Census indicates that 81% of the La Quinta residents are high school graduates and 21% are college graduates (Source: Census/Estimates). Local Environmenral ,Setting The project site consists of a 746.6 acre parcel of largely vacant cove and hillside land. There are two existing housing units on the property. One unit is a caretakers unit scheduled for demolition, and the other is a large hacienda that will be incorporated into the project as a sales and administrative office. A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? Less Than Significant Impact. The development planned for this project will ultimately result in the construction of 241 new custom built detached single family units. While the City's average population is 2.85 per dwelling unit, the proposed project is projected to have a lower per unit population given the fact that it will be a private country club with high -end custom home lots. Typically, people buying into this type of project are among the high income individuals, usually older, with grown children no longer living with them. Often they will be seasonal residents, as opposed to permanent residents. Using the factor of 1.94 people per unit, the potential build -out population for the project could be 467.54 new residents in the City. Temporary construction -related jobs will be created as the new units, clubhouse and other buildings are built. New permanent or temporary jobs will be created as a result of the project. There may be new jobs created for administration and maintenance of the country club and golf course, managers and servers for the half -way house and clubhouse, and security personnel for the country club. The number of new jobs generated by the project is estimated by the applicant to be 80 to 90. No jobs will be lost as a result of the project as no one is currently living on the property. New jobs will benefit the community, and result in a positive impact. B. Would the project induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision and related development will make an impact in the surrounding area as major infrastructure could be altered or required to be extended to the project site (Source: Site Survey). This impact is not anticipated to be significant, as there is existing development to the west, north, and east of the project site with infrastructure already in place. Some of this development first appeared in the mid-1930's (Source: Draft Historic Context Statement for City of La Quinta). The immediate area around the project site has been developed to the point that H42 there are few vacant parcels remaining. An existing telephone company fiber optic cable line will [teed to be relocated from its present location along Old Ave. 52 to a location approved by the telephone company. The applicant is responsible for coordinating and paying for the relocation. C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? Less Than Significant Impact. Two existing residential units are located on the project site the hacienda and a caretakers house. The future development plan is to create 241 custom single family homesites utilizing private funds. The proposed project will result in the removal of one existing housing unit that has been used historically as housing for the ranch caretaker. The house is not currently occupied. The applicant has requested permission to demolish the structure. Demolition will be subject to approval by the City Council (Source: Site Survey, Application Materials; Historic Preservation Ordinance). 3.3 EARTH RESOURCES Regional Environmental ,Setting The City of La Quinta has a relatively flat, but gently sloping topography, except for the hillside area on the southern and western portions of the City. Elevations in the southeastern portion of the City reach 1,400 feet above msl. Slopes on the valley floor area of the City are gentle, except in the rolling sand dune areas. The alluvial soils that make up most of the City are underlain by igneous -metamorphic rock, as seen in outcrops in the Santa Rosa Mountains and the Coral Reef Mountains. Soils on the valley floor are made up of very fine grain unconsolidated silty sands. The Coachella Valley is underlain by hundreds of feet to several thousand feet of Quaternary fluvial, lacustrine, and aeolian soil deposits (Southland Geotechnical 1996:6). Local Environmental.4etting The area where the parcel is located is in a historical part of the City. A review of historical aerial photographs indicates that the site has been farmed. The elevation of the property, ranges from approximately 42 to 1,482 feet above mean sea level (Source: VTTM 28470; USGS La Quinta Quad Map). A large portion of the project site will not be developed, as it is located in the steep, rocky Coral Reef Mountains. There is an inferred earthquake fault line located approximately I/2 mile to the south of the southern boundary of the parcel, and one 3/4 mile to the east. There has been no recorded activity along these fault lines, thus there is a low probability for such activity to occur. The City of La Quinta lies in a seismicallv active region of Southern California. Faults in the region include the San Andreas and Mission Creek faults located several miles to the north and west. The project lies within Groundshaking Zone III with Zone 12 being the most hazardous (Sources: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan; La Quinta General Plan; La Quinta MEA). A Preliminary Soil Investigation was conducted on the project site, in November 1984, by Buena Engineers, Inc. The report was prepared for Tract 20328, the Sand Pebble Country Club. This report identifies three soil types on the property, light brown slightly silty fine to course sand and gravel, light brown silt and very fine sand, and brown silty fine to medium sand with some gravel. The investigation included ten borings drilled in various portions of the project site. The report states that the bearing soils showed expansion indices of zero when tested. All indications are that the soils on the site will allow for the proposed development. According to the Soil Survey of Riverside County, California, Coachella Valley Area, prepared by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service in 1979, indicates that there are seven different types of soils present on the project site. These include: CdC - Carsitas gravely sand, RO - Rock outcrop, RU - Rubble land, MaB - Myoma fine sand, GbA - Gilman fine sandy learn, Ip - Indio fine sandy loam, and CcC - Carrizo stony sand. Each of these soil types has distinctive features and characteristics. The CdC soil is found on alluvial fans within slopes of 0 to 9 %. Runoff is slow, erosion hazard is moderate. The best uses of this soil are for watershed, wildlife habitat, recreation, and homesites. The shrink -swell potential is low. Corrosion to uncoated steel is high, but low to concrete. This soil tends to cave at cutbanks. The higher taxonomic classification for this soil is mixed, hyperthermic Typic Torripsamment. The RO soil type does not include any real soil, but rather rock outcrop consisting of granite, gneiss, mica, schist, and sandstone. These rocks are typically covered with Desert Varnish. The RU is found on very old alluvial fans. Riverwash is found alongside the main drainage -ways among the steep slopes. Desert Varnish is commonly found on rocks in the Rubble land. The best uses consist of watershed, wildlife habitat, and recreation. Vegetation in Rubble land commonly consists of brush, creosote bush, barrel cactus, bush sunflower, ocotillo, and some clumps of annual grass. MaB soih is found on level to gently sloping alluvial fans where it is merged with finer textured flood plain and basin soils. Runoff is very slow, and erosion hazard is slight. The best uses are for truck crops, citrus, grapes, alfalfa hay, homesites, and recreation. The shrink -swell potential is low. Corrosion of concrete is low. Uncoated steel will corrode easily in this soil. Cutbanks will cave in shallow excavations. The higher taxonomic classification of this soil is mixed, hyperthermic Typic Torripsamment. GbA soil is found in nearly level areas. Runoff is very slow. Erosion hazard is slight. Blowing soil potential is moderate. Best uses are for truck crops, alfalfa hay, citrus, and grapes. The shrink -swell potential is low. Uncoated steel will easily corrode in this soil, however, concrete will not easily corrode. This soil type is subject to flooding. It is classified as coarse -loamy, mixed (calcareous) hyperthermic Typic Torrifluvent. (p soil is found on nearly level areas. Runoff is slow, erosion hazard is slight. Blowing soil potential is moderate. This soil is best used for farming. The shrink -swell potential is low. Uncoated steel will easily corrode, but concrete will not. It is classified as coarse -silty, mixed (calcareous) hyperthermic Typic Torrifluvent. CcC soil is found on alluvial fan slopes between 2 and 9 %. Runoff is slow, erosion hazard is slight. The best uses of this soil are for watershed and wildlife habitat. The shrink -swell potential is low. Cutbanks are subject to caving. There tend to be large stones in this soil. This soil tend to flood. The classification of this soil is sandy -skeletal, mixed, hyperthermic Typic Torriorthent (Source: Soil Conservation Service 1979). In 1986, a, grading plan review of Tract 20328 was performed by Leighton and Associates. The report reviewed the geotechnical aspects of proposed grading at that time. In addition, a review of the Buena Engineers soil study was also conducted, as well as additional exploratory work to further evaluate the project soils. Conclusions of the study included that the types of classifications of soils exposed at the surface had not been fully mapped in order to better correlate grading recommendations; that the depth to ground water had not been determined; that the potential seismic hazards and effects had not been discussed in the earlier report; that lots proposed along the foot of the boulder strewn mountains could be subject to rock fall in the event of severe ground shaking by an earthquake; that depending on the degree of weathering, excavation of rock could become difficult, possibly requiring blasting in some areas; that premoistening should be anticipated to require a week or more prior to grading; and that certain overexcavation requirements for two- and three-story structures were not discussed in the earlier soils report (Source: Leighton and Associates IN& 4-5). A letter update of the geotechnical investigation was conducted for the project site by Earth Svstems Consultants, dated October 10, 1996. The letter addresses the areas previously graded by CVWD and the special attention needed to verify adequate compaction for density and moisture conditions. Proposed building pads located at the toe of the slope are discussed, including the recommended mitigation against rockfall hazard. This mitigation consists of constructing a swale near the toe of the slope and a fence on the house side of the swale. Site drainage is addressed in the letter with six recommendations offered: I. Control of surface drainage is important to the successful development of the property. Surface drainage control should be provided throughout the completed project to protect the future stability of foundations and other site improvements. A positive gradient should be provided away from structures and should be directed towards an approved drainage discharge area in a nonerosive manner. Down spouts from the roof of the houses should discharge collected rainwater onto splash blocks, adjacent paved areas, or be tied into a water -tight drainage 10 � �. pipe. which would carry the collected water away from the houses to approved point(s) of discharge. 3. Rear and side yard surface drainage should not be allowed to be blocked from flowing to approved points of discharge by future sidewalks, patios, or landscaping. 4. Landscaping should be such that excess irrigation water is not allowed to pond on or near the structure or areas to be paved. Additionally, care should be taken so as not to over water landscaped area. Irrigation should be only sufficient to sustain plant life. 5. Failure to control excess moisture could result in settlement and soil erosion, which could compound the problem by rupturing water lines or other services and/or utilities, thus introducing additional moisture into the underlying soil. 6. No grading or excavating should be undertaken within the subject site without review by the geotechnical engineer (Source: Earth Systems Consultants 1996). The report concluded with the request that the project plans, be submitted to Earth Systems office for review of the geotechnical aspects to verify the recommendations contained in the Buena Engineers (1984) soils study and to provide supplemental recommendations as necessary. Another Geotechnical Update was prepared by Sladden Engineering, dated December 12, 1996. The report reviewed the rough grading plans for the proposed golf course. This review stated that the previous geotechnical reports .contained useful information concerning site soil conditions and that the recommendations remain valid for the design and construction of the project. Clarification of previous recommendations was offered. A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: fault rupture? Less Than Significant Impact. There is an inferred fault line located as close as 1/2 mile south of the project site. This fault is considered potentially active, although no activity has been recorded for the last 10,000 years. A major earthquake along the fault would be capable of generating seismic hazards and strong groundshaking effects in the area. None of the inferred faults in La Quinta have been placed in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. All homes developed on the proposed lots would be required to be constructed to current Uniform Building Code (UBC) seismic standards in order to mitigate risk of collapse to the extent feasible (Sources: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan: Citv of La Quinta General Plan. La Quinta MEA, UBC). While accurate earthquake predictions are not possible, significant geologic information and statistical analvsis have been complied, analyzed, and published intensely by various agencies over the past 25 years. It has been reported that a 22% conditional probability occurrence for the 30-year period from 1994 to 2024 that a magnitude 7.5 event or • 0 greater would occur alone the Coachella Valley segment of the San Andreas Fault. The primary risk to the project is the San Andreas Fault. The Coachella Vallev Segment of the fault comprises the southern 115 km of the fault zone. This segment has the longest elapsed time of any portion of the San Andreas Fault, last experiencing an event about 1690 AD based on USGS dating of trench surveys near Indio. The San Andreas Fault zone is considered to have characteristic earthquakes that ruptures each fault segment. The San Andreas Fault may rupture in multiple segments producing a higher magnitude earthquake (Source: Southland Geotechnical 1996). Fault rupture is not anticipated to occur at the project site because of the well -delineated fault lines through this region as shown on United States Geological Survey and California Division of Mines and Geology maps are not near the project site location. However, because the site is located in an area of high tectonic activity, the potential for surface rupture on undiscovered or new faults that may underlie the site can not be discounted (Source: Southland Geotechnical 1996:8). B. 'Would the project results in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact. The future residential development will be subject to groundshaking hazards from regional and local events. The proposed project will bring people to the site who could be subject to these hazards. The Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan indicates that the lots are within. Groundshaking Zone III. A Zone I1.1 is an area with moderate shaking qualities but less severe than a Zone 12 which is the highest level. Any homes constructed will be required to meet current seismic standards of construction to reduce, or mitigate to the extent feasible, the risk of structural collapse. The recommendations of the geotechnical report prepared for this project shall become conditions of approval. The land is generally suitable for the proposed project (Sources: La Quinta MEA). The primary seismic hazard at the project site is strong groundshaking from earthquakes along the San Andreas and San Jacinto (Source: La Quinta MEA; Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan). C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not in an area that is anticipated to be subject to ground failure hazards from earthquake or other events due to the distance from regional fault lines. The La Quinta General Plan indicates that the project site is not within a recognized liquefaction hazard area. The majority of the City has a very low liquefaction susceptibility due to the fact that ground water levels are generally at least 100 feet below the ground surface (Source: La Quinta MEA. Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan). Liquefaction is not considered a potential hazard since the groundwater is believed to be deeper than 50 feet (the maximum depth that liquefaction is known to occur) (Source: Southland Geotechnical 1996:8). D. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard? No Impact. The City is located in an inland valley, separated from the Pacific Ocean by mountain ranges, and would not be subjected to a tsunami. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir located in the southeast portion of the City, might experience some moderate wave activity as a result of an earthquake and groundshaking. However, the lake is not anticipated to affect this project in the event of a levee failure or seiche because the lake is on the other side of the Coral Reef Mountains (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map). E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving landslides or mudflows? Potential Impact Unless Mitigated. The terrain within and surrounding the project site is that gently sloping alluvial plain abutting steep rocky hillsides. The parcel is adjacent to the Coral Reef Mountains, thus, there is a potential danger from landslides and rockfall at those areas adjacent to the toe of the slope. No mudflows are anticipated for this project, as the adjacent hills and mountains are formed of rocky granitic material. The general area of the project site is protected from flood waters by earthen training dikes and retention basins that are located at the southern boundary of the project, and existing retention basins and drainage channels within the project site. Additional on -site retention basins are proposdd for the project site that will be incorporated into the 18-hole gold course features (Source: La Quinta MEA, La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map; TT 28470). The Earth Svstem Consultants (1996) geotechnical report update prepared for the project states that there is a potential for rockfall hazard at the toe of the existing rock slopes. The Sladden Geotechnical Update report also stated that the potential for rockfall affecting the .building pads along the toe of steep natural rock slopes should be acknowledged. The potential rockfall hazard appears to be limited to several building pads along the south and east edge of the site. The drainage swales indicated along the toe of the native rock slopes as indicated on the rough grading plans appears to approximately address rockfall hazards at this time. The rockfall hazard potential should be evaluated after rough grading and lot specific mitigation measures should be incorporated into individual fine grading plans and building layout determination. F. 'Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? 0 • Less Than significant Impact. The soils on the project site and geotechnical studies done in the vicinity of the project site show that the area is underlain by alluvial deposits of Pleistocene age. The soils on the site consists of Carrizo Carsitas sand in the alluvial fan, Mvoma Fine Sand and Gilman Loam abutting Avenue 52, and Granite and Metamorphic Rock in the Coral Reef Mountains. Carsitas soils are generally used for citrus and grape Growing, agricultural uses, wildlife habitat, recreational uses, and watershed areas. Carsitas and Gilman soils are permeable. Myoma soils are generally used for crops and homesites, and are excessively drained and include rapidly permeable soil. The MaD soil type is found on 5 to 15% slopes in alluvial fans. Runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is slight. The hazard of blow sand is high. This soil type is acceptable for homesites, recreation, and agriculture. The taxonomic class for this soil is mixed hyperthermic Typic Torrispaments. The MaD type is calcareous (Source: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Soil Survev of Riverside County, California - Coachella Valley Area; EA 92-240). Approximately 1,888,730 cubic yards of mass grading involving balanced cut and fill is projected for the project (Sources: TTM 28470 Grading Plan). Compliance with the recommendations of the grading plans and geotechnical studies for the project will ensure structural integrity of development on the site. Such compliance will be a condition of approval for the project. Monitoring of compliance will be provided by the City's Public Works Department staff. On December 17, 1996, the La Quinta City Council approved the issuance of an at -risk grading permit for the proposed golf course with the condition that the applicant post a bond equal to one-half the total cost of the grading in case the project is not approved or is modified at the public hearing so that restoration of the property can be performed. G. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving subsidence of the land? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not located in an area designated for subsidence hazards. Dynamic settlement results in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated soils mix with perched groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground (Source: La Quinta MEA). H, Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils? Less Than Significant Impact. The underlying soils on the parcels have a low potential for expansion, thus future construction is not expected to be subject to problems from soil expansion. The City requires compliance with the Uniform Building Code and the recommendations of a soils investigation report prior to issuance of building and grading permits (Sources: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Riverside County, California - Coachella Valley Area). 0 I. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving unique geologic or physical features? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The Coral Reef Mountains represent a unique geologic feature in the La Quinta area. This unique feature is located within the project site boundaries and could be affected by the proposed project. The proposed golf tee area that is elevated into the mountain and the six proposed homesites that at the southern high cove area of the project may require grading measures that will cut into the mountain. A geotechnical report prepared for a previous project on this project site stated that .."Depending on the degree of weathering, excavation of rock could become difficult, possibly requiring blasting in some areas (Sources: Leighton and Associates 1986:5; La Quinta MICA; USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map; Site Survey; TT 28470). The applicant has stated that no blasting will be utilized. No blasting would be permitted by the City for this project due to the impacts to the wildlife and associated habitat within the Coral Reef Mountains, as well as potential geologic hazards. 3.4 WATER Regional Environmental Setting Groundwater resources in the La Quinta area consist of a system of large aquifers (porous layers of rock material containing water) and groundwater basins separated by bedrock or layers of soil that trap or retain groundwater. La Quinta is located above the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin which is the major water supply for the potable water needs of the City as well as a significant supply for the City's nonpotable irrigation needs. Water is pumped from the underground aquifer via domestic water wells in the City operated and administered by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). La Quinta is located primarily in the lower Thermal Subarea of the groundwater basin. The Thermal Subarea is separated into the upper and lower valley sub -basins near Point Happy, located southwest of the intersection of Washington Street and State Highway I11. CVWD estimates that approximately 19.4 million acre feet of water is stored within the Thermal Subarea which is available for use. Water pumped from the aquifer is treated and distributed to users through the existing (potable) water distribution system. Water is also pumped for irrigation purposes to water golf courses and the remaining agricultural uses in the City. Water supplies are augmented with surface water from the Colorado River transported via the Coachella Canal. The quality of water in the La Quinta area is highly suitable for domestic purposes. However. chemicals associated with agricultural production in nearby areas and the use of septic tanks in the Cove area affect groundwater quality. Groundwater is of marginal to poor quality at depths of less than 200 feet. Below 200 feet. water quality is generally good and water depths of 400 to 600 feet are considered excellent. 1J Percolations from the tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the Santa Rosa Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial recharging of groundwater will be a necessary in the near future. Surface water in La Quinta is comprised of Colorado River water supplied via the Coachella Canal and stored in the Lake Cahuilla reservoir; lakes in private developments which are comprised of canal water and/or untreated groundwater, and the Whitewater River and its tributaries. The watersheds in La Quinta are subject to intense storms of short duration which result in substantial runoff. The steep gradient of the Santa Rosa Mountains accelerates the runoff flowing in the intermittent streams that drain the mountain watersheds. La Quinta is protected from this runoff by the existing flood control facilities located throughout the City. One of the primary sources of surface water pollution is erosion and sedimentation from development construction and operation activities. Without controls, total dissolved solids (TDS) can increase significantly from the development activities. The Clean Water Act requires all communities to conform to standards regulating the quality of water discharged into streams, including stormwater runoff. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) has been implemented as a two-part permitting process, for which the; City of La Quinta participates. La Quinta is protected from storm water runoff by a stormwater system designed by Bechtel for the Coachella Valley Water District to protect currently developed and potentially developable areas of the City from damage during a major rainflood event. The system project was based on a flood control plan for the general area developed by Bechtel for the District in 1970. Construction was completed in November 1986 (Source: Bechtel Civil, Inc. 1989:1). Local Environmental. Setting The project site does not have any natural standing water. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir is located approximately two miles to the southeast, on the other side of the Coral Reef Mountain. The Whitewater River channel is located slightly over 3 miles to the north of the project site, but is dry except during seasonal storms. The La Quinta Stormwater Channel is located approximately l mile to the north is a part of the community -wide network of flood control facilities. The City currently has only limited areas which are still subject to storm water flow or flooding. Flood prone areas are designated with a specific zoning district (Watercourse, Watershed and Conservation Areas: W-1). The intent of this zoning district is to allow development in flood prone areas based upon the submittal of a drainage and stormwater control plan. The City also implements flood hazard regulations for development within flood prone areas. 0 0 Existing flood control facilities on the proposed project site are a part of the City-wide Stormwater Project - East La Quinta System. The facilities were designed by a previous developer's engineer, with the design reviewed by Bechtel. Construction of these facilities was completed in mid-1988, by E. L. Yeager Construction Company. The East La Quinta System intercepts and controls runoff originating in the drainage area in the foothills east and southeast of Avenida Bermudas, and from the presently developed area of the City of La Quinta south of Calle Durango. The system consists of the Upper Training Dike. Calle Tecate Detention Basin, East La Quinta Channel, Avenida Bermudas Detention Basin, the proposed Tradition project site facilities, and a 60-inch diameter buried stormwater conduit. The detention basin on the project site has a storage volume of about 520 A.F. below El. 59, while maintaining a minimum one foot freeboard (Source: Bechtel Civil, Inc. 1989). A Hydrology/Hydraulic Report was prepared for the project site, in October 1996, by Keith International, Inc.. The project proposes areas north of the detention basin to provide for on site retention. Runoff from the residential, clubhouse, and golf course areas will be conveyed to depressions located within the golf course. The retention areas have been integrated into the golf course grading plan as golfing amenities. The basin sizing is based on the total run off from a 24 hour - 100 year event. Five basins are proposed with the following locations and capacities: Basin Hole # Basin Capacity 1 16 7.90 acre feet 2 Driving Range 83.50 acre feet ?; 4 14.50 4 2 & 3 31.30 5 1 41.80 (lake) The hydrology study modeled the 100-year and 10 year storm events to determine which storm will generate the greatest storm volume. The results will be utilized to determine the size of the retention basins. It was determined that historic flows are retained onsite, thus the proposed development must retain all of the flows onsite (Source: Keith International. Inc. 1996). A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff' Less Than Significant Impact. An approved drainage plan will be required prior to issuance of a grading permit, based upon the recommendations and results of the Drainage study prepared by Keith International. Inc., October 1996. There will be changes in absorption rates, but not drainage patterns or surface runoff as a result of the proposed project. The absorption rate will be altered by the paving of streets, building of homes, and landscaping of yards, landscape lots, and the golf course. The traditional historical 0 0 drainage pattern will be maintained as is required by the City. Retention basins and other facilities will catch and hold the surface runoff storm water on -site. The proposed Tradition project (241 lots) is significantly less dense than the former "Heritage" project (330 homes), and the even earlier project "Crystal Canyon' with 890 units, reducing the runoff rate and flood volumes to these existing structures. Since the on site development has a reduced density (compared with the original design assumptions used for the Heritage Country Club) with fewer homes and increased landscaping, peak runoff flows and flood volumes will also be reduced (Keith International, Inc. 1996). B. Would the project result in exposure of people or property to water -related hazards such as flooding? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is partially within the AO designated flood hazard area in the northeastern portion of the project site. The AO designation is the 100 year flood plain FIRM zone in which the hazard factors have been determined. There are existing on -site flood control or drainage facilities on the property, that were constructed by the Coachella Valley Water District as part of the East La Quinta Storm Drain system. These improvements were coordinated with an earlier planned golf course development, formally known as the "Heritage Country Club The proposed project intends to fully utilize these existing improvements and integrate them into the overall development and drainage system. The existing structures and basins will remain in place. The new design will maintain all structure capacities and volumes. The proposed Tradition project is significantly less dense than the earlier "Heritage Country Club", reducing the runoff rate and flood volumes to these existing structures. The proposed development has submitted a drainage plan which will include 5 additional retention basins and drainage improvements onsite (Source: Keith International, Inc. 1996). C. Would the project result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity).? Less Than Significant Impact. Runoff from the project site will be required to be directed into the five proposed retention basins and be controlled by both existing and proposed drainage facilities. There are no existing bodies of surface water on or adjacent to the iproject site. Five lakes are proposed for the golf course which will also function as retention areas (Source: Site Survey. Coachella Vallev Water District; TT 28470). D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? Less Than Significant Impact. There are no bodies of surface water on the subject parcel. Five man-made lakes within the golf course are proposed. Runoff water is designed to flow into these lakes. Although a substantial amount of runoff volume will come from the Coral Reef Mountains, it is not expected to significantly impact surface water. The size 0 0 of the project represents a sizable percentage of the drainage tributary area for the City (Source: Site Survey, Keith International. Inc. 1996). E. Would the project realest in changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? Less Than significant Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have any substantial natural bodies of water or rivers. There are many small man-made lakes and ponds on golf courses within the City. A few agricultural reservoirs are still in use, as well. The La Quinta Evacuation Channel is a man-made stormwater channel that is usually dry except for runoff.' from seasonal storms. The future development of the project site with the proposed land use designations will not affect, to a significant degree, any existing drainage corridor (Source: Site Survey; TTM 28470; La Quinta MEA). F. Would the project result in changes in quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawl, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or by excavations? Less Than Significant Impact. Water supply in the City is derived from groundwater and supplementary water brought in from the Colorado River. The proposed development of the project site will consist of single family units and the golf course. Potable water to service this development will most likely come from existing groundwater wells in the near vicinitv and a new well to be located by the third green. The proposed golf course will be irrigated from existing wells on the project site. These wells were formerly used for agricultural irrigation and are in working order. The Planning Standard for residential water consumption is 315 Gal/DU/Day. The day water consumption would be 241 units x 315 GaIMU/Day = 75,915 Gallons for the single family residential use. Other uses proposed for the project include the rehabilitation of the historic mansion for use as administrative offices, the future construction of a clubhouse, maintenance building, half- wav house, and cart bam. The Coachella Valley Water District has stated that it will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to the project, but will need additional facilities to provide for expansion of its domestic water system. These new facilities may include wells, reservoirs, and booster pumping stations. Water from the Coachella Canal is also available for irrigation of the golf course and green belt areas that are within Improvement District No. 1 (Sources: La Quinta MEA, Application Materials; Coachella Vallev Water District). G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed subdivision might have a significant effect on groundwater wells. It is not anticipated that there will be any significant alteration to the direction of flow of the groundwater supply, however, the rate of flow may be impacted due to high demand for water. No deep cuts are proposed with this project that would reach the depth of the groundwater, other that the drilling of a new water well. The proposed well would reach a depth of potable water which would impact of the local groundwater rate of flow and possibly direction (Source: Tentative Tract 28470). The Coachella Valley Water District stated that local groundwater supplies may not be adequate to supply long-term domestic or irrigation demands. Groundwater pumping will be subject to a replenishment assessment to provide a funding mechanism for importation of additional water supplies (Source: CVWD letter of Nov. 14, 1996). H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality? Less Than Significant Impact. Future development of the project site will include concrete and asphalt pavement of portions of the site, and golf course pathways. This pavement will reduce the absorption ability of the ground. Storm water runoff will be discharged into on -site basins channels, lakes, and pipes. Following a heavy rain, contaminates could be transported into the basins or into the nearby storm drains that could contribute to groundwater and/or surface water pollution. However, this potential impact is anticipated to be less than significant. Golf course lake best management practices will be required to be implemented in order to minimize surface water pollution. The applicant will be required to line the golf course lakes with an impermeable product with a hard edge grouted in. 3.5 AIR QUALITY Regional Environmental Setting The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and in particular, the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB) division. SEDAB has a distinctly different air pollution problem than the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). A discussion of the jurisdictional organization of SCAQMD and requirements is found in the La Quinta MEA. The air quality in Southern California region has historically been poor due to the topography, climatological influences, and urbanization. State and federal clean air standards established by the California Air Resources Board and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are often exceeded. The SCAQMD is a regional agency charged with the regulation of pollutant emissions and the maintenance of local air quality standards. The SCAQMD samples air at over 32 monitoring station in and around the Basin. According to the 1989 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan, SEDAB experiences poor air quality, but of a lesser extent than the SCAB. Currently, the SEDAB does not meet federal standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter (PM- 10). In the Coachella Valley, the standard for PM-10 is frequently exceeded. PM-10 is a particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter that becomes suspended in the air due to winds. grading activity, and by vehicles traveling on unpaved roads, among other causes. 0 Local Environmental. Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, which has an and climate, characterized by hot summers, mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and low humidity. Variations in rainfall, temperatures, and localized winds occur throughout the vallev due to the presence of the surrounding mountains. Air quality conditions are closely tied to the prevailing winds of the region. The City of La Quinta is subject to the SCAQMD AQMD, a plan which describes measures to bring the SCAB into compliance with federal and state air quality standards and to meet California Clean Air Act requirements. The General Plan for the City contains an Air Quality Element outlining mitigation measures as required by the Regional AQMP. The City is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes two air quality monitoring stations, one located in the City of Palm Springs, and the other in the City of Indio. The Indio station monitors conditions which are most representative of the La Quinta area. The station has been collecting data for ozone and particulates since 1993. The Palm Springs station monitors carbon monoxide in addition to ozone and particulate and has been in operation since 1985. A. Would the project violate any air standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The South Coast Air Quality Management District CEOA Air Quality Handbook indicates that the threshold for significance in single family development is at 170 units. Above 170 units may result in a significant impact to the air quality, unless mitigation is implemented. To assess the potential impacts of this project, a computerized air quality analysis was conducted by Community Development staff. The assessment indicated that the proposed project would produce temporary construction emissions during the construction of the 241 single family home sites. Emissions produced during construction would vary daily depending on the type of activity. Emissions would be generated during grading, framebuilding and other construction activities. Grading and construction would result in a less than significant air quality impact (Source: Screen.xls). The table below quantifies the emissions: Construction Emissions: Project Emissions (Ibs/day) ROG NOX CO PM 10 40.7 64.5 253.2 146.7 SEDAB Thresholds (Ibs/day) ROG NOX CO PMIO 75 100 550 150 (Source: SCREEN.XLS) Implementation of the proposed project would result in long-term direct and indirect air pollutant emissions. Direct emissions would be generated by the use of motor vehicles and natural gas appliances. Indirect emissions would be generated during the use of electricity. No wood burning emissions would be generated by the proposed project except for residential fireplaces. Emissions from motor vehicle operation are anticipated to result in the greatest long-term air quality impact associated with development of the proposed project. The report concludes that the significance thresholds would not be exceeded for ROG, CO. PM-10, and Nox. This impact is considered to be less than significant. The proposed project would not contribute significantly to regional or local air quality impacts. The following construction emission mitigation measures will reduce Nox emissions: 1. Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference. 2. Provide temporary traffic control during busy construction periods to improve traffic flow. 3. Schedule construction activities that affect traffic flow to off-peak hours. 4. Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. 5. Prevent construction trucks from idling longer than two minutes. 6. All construction equipment shall be maintained to prevent visible soot from reducing light transmission through the exhaust stack exit by more than 20 percent for more than 3 minutes per hour and use low -sulfur fuel as required by SCAQMD regulation. However, even with the implementation of the above measures, the construction -related Nox emissions would continue to exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, construction emissions of Nox would be considered significant and unavoidable. To mitigate for the over-all air quality impact that may result for the project, the following SCAQMD mitigation measures will be required: Best available mitigtion measures for construction: 1. Low emission on -site mobile equipment (tractor, scraper, dozer, etc.) will result in an approximate 60% emission reduction efficiency. 2. Energy use - use electricity from power plants or clean fuel generators rather than temporary diesel powered generators. This will reduce emissions by 50 to 98% 3. Fugitive dust from roads - Pave construction roads that have a traffic volume of less than 50 daily vehicle trips to reduce fugitive dust by 90 to 99%. _y tti:5'�4 i 0 Best available mitigation measures for operation activities: Residential energy use: l . Use solar or low emission water heaters for a 40% emission reduction. 2. Use central water heating systems (emission reduction not quantified) 3. Use built-in energy efficient appliances for a 10 to 20% emission reduction. 4. Building orientation should be to the north for natural cooling (efficiency not quantified) 5. Provide shade trees to reduce heat for a 55% energy reduction. 6. Use energy efficient and automated controls for air conditioners for a 30% energy reduction. 7. use double -glass paned windows for a 20% energy reduction. Clubhouse: Construction phases. 1. Implement on -site circulation plan in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing (emission reduction not quantified) Energy use: 1. use energy efficient low sodium parking lot lights for a 55% energy reduction. 2. Use lighting controls and energy efficient lighting for a 60 to 75 % energy reduction. 3. Require recycling bins in addition to trash bins and contract for recycling services. 4. Increase walls and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements for a 5 to 9 % energy reduction. 5. use light colored roof materials to reflect heat. 6. use building materials that do not require use of paints and solvents for an 80 to 100% emission reduction. 7. Provide dedicated parking spaces with electrical outlets for electrical vehicles. With the implementation of the above recommended mitigation measures, the potentially significant air quality impacts will be reduced to a level of insignificance (Source: SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook). B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants.' Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors include schools, day care centers. parks and recreation centers, medical facilities, rest homes. and other land uses that include concentration of individuals recognized as exhibiting particular sensitivity to air pollution. The adjacent land uses consist of residential to the west and north, residential development to the northeast, and open space to the south and east. The closest schools located to the proposed project are the new Adams Elementary School located north of �t-. 0 • Calle Tampico and west of Washington Street, and the La Quinta Middle School and Truman Elementary School located east of Washington Street and north of Avenue 50. The closest existing public park is the Fritz B. Burns Park located near the northwest corner of the project. The Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) are designed to protect that segment of the public most susceptible to respiratory distress or infection, referred to as "sensitive receptors." (Sources: La Quinta General Plan; Site Survey). C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any change in climate? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision is not anticipated to result in any significant impact upon this issue area. All proposed 241 home sites will be required to meet height and setback requirements, maintaining a low profile. Two-story units may be approved for construction. Moisture content may increase as the golf course and individual yards are planted and irrigated. Swimming pools would add to the moisture index of the area. There are no significant climatic changes anticipated with the future development of the parcels. There is no feasible mitigation for this issue other than to not construct the golf course or to reduce the golf course to 9-holes. The applicant is not proposing any alternative designs for this project. D. Would the project create objectionable odors? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not result in development which may create objectionable odors, such as waste hauling or chemical products. Vehicles traveling on nearby and internal project streets generate gaseous and particular emissions that may be noticeable on the project site. However, these would be short-term odors that should dissipate quickly (Source: Site Survey). 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Regional Environmental Setting La Quinta is a desert community of over 18,600 permanent residents. The City is 31.18 square miles in size, with substantial room for development. The existing circulation system is a combination of early roadwork constructed in the 1930's by Riverside County and new roadways since incorporation of the City in 1982. Key roadways include State Highway 11l, Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, and Eisenhower Drive. Traffic volumes in La Quinta experience considerable seasonal variation, with the late - winter, early spring months representing the peak tourist season and highest traffic volumes. There is a relatively low incidence of automobile accidents at the intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 52. According to the City Engineering Department, there were 15 vehicular accidents at this intersection between 1988 and 1989 (Source: Traffic Collision Data, City of La Quinta: La Quinta General Plan). Between January 1993 and December 1994, there were six accidents. In 1995, there were two accidents. And, in 1996. there: was one accident between January and March (Source: SWITRS: Public Works Department). Existing transit service in La Quinta is limited to three regional fixed -route bus routes operated by Sunline Transit Agency. One bus route along Washington Street connects the Cove and Village areas with the community of Palm Desert to the west. Two lines operate along Highway l 11 serving trips between La Quinta and other communities in the desert. There are only a few existing pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian facilities in La Quinta, however, these systems will be expanded as the City grows. These facilities, both existing and future, are designated in the La Quinta General Plan. Local Environmental Setting The subject project site is located south of the southern terminus of Washington Street, east of Avenida Bermudas. Washington Street is classified as a major arterial with a 120 foot fight -of -way. The intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 52 is currently controlled, by 4-way stop signs. Avenida Bermudas is classified as a secondary arterial with an 80-foot right-of-way. Avenida Bermudas is located along the western boundary of the project site. It is designated as a bikeway corridor. The La Quinta General Plan gives design standards for the various street classifications. According to the standards for major arterials, the projected buildout traffic volume for Washington Street, north of the subject property will exceed the volume range. It is projected that Washington Street will experience a daily traffic volume of 52,600 south of Avenue 50, at buildout, providing a Level Of Service D (LOS-D). LOS-D has unstable flow with poor progression and frequent cycle failures. This is considered the limit of acceptable delay. LOS F has oversaturation with arrival flow rates exceeding the capacity of the intersection and is considered unacceptable to most drivers. A more detailed explanation of buildout traffic conditions and levels of service is found in the La Quinta General Plan. The current average daily traffic flows for Washington Street, south of Avenue 50 are 13,697 vehicles per day and 16,354 vehicles per day south of Eisenhower DriLe. The existing traffic volume at the intersection of Avenue 52 and Washington Street is 7,982 vpd with 4,271 vpd entering or leaving Washington Street. This intersection has met warrants for a signal (Source: Public Works Department). A. 'Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Housing units for this project site are less than what was used in the "build -out" traffic model for the 1991 La Quinta General Plan. Potential development The project is incorporating mitigation improvements as identified and required by the General Plan of the project site is forecasted to generate approximately 4.588 daily vehicle trips from the 241 single family lots, the 271 acre golf course. and approximately 1,000 square feet of administrative office space within the historic hacienda (Source: Trips.xls; Keith International, Inc.). Additional daily vehicle trips may be generated by the proposed buildings. B. Would the project result in hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact. There are no identified hazards from design features in the existing roadways or the proposed circulation system. Automobile, motorcycle, and golf cart traffic are the only types of vehicles that typically use private residential streets, with the exception of delivery trucks. A golf cart path system will be constructed within the country club (Source: TTM 28470). C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses? Less Than Significant Impact. Future development of the project site would not be permitted to obstruct emergency access to surrounding land uses. This requirement would be made a part of project conditions of approval. Review of development plans by the Fire Department did identify that a secondary access is required along Avenida Bermudas. Additional emergency accesses will also be required by the City for the project. D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? Less Than Significant Impact. Parking will be required for each custom-built housing unit as it is constructed, which will consist of a two to three car garage, and tandem parking in the driveway. On -street parking will not be available (Source: La Quinta Zoning Ordinance: La Quinta Subdivision Ordinance. Application Materials). Parking for the clubhouse, maintenance yard, and administrative offices will be required to meet the parking standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes a total of 158 parking spaces. lour of which are designated for handicapped vehicles. The Zoning Ordinance requires a total of 129 spaces for the proposed uses. E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists? Less Than Significant Impact. The east side of Avenida Bermudas and the east side of Washington Street are designated bikeway corridors. It is anticipated that hazards to bicvclists and pedestrians will not be increased significantly as a result of the proposed development (Source: La Quinta General Plan). The bicycle and pedestrian corridors will be outside of the project perimeter wall, along the east side of Avenue Bermudas. There will not be any identifiable increase in hazards than currently exist. C51 0 • F. . Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)'. No Impact. Bicycle racks are only required for commercial land uses. The Zoning Ordinance does not require bicycle racks for residential projects. The proposed project will be reviewed by the Sunline Transit Agency for needed' bus turnouts (Source: La Quinta Zoning Ordinance). Bicycle racks should be provided for the Clubhouse. G. Would the project result in rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? No impacts. There is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. The closest rail line is approximately six miles to the north of the project site. There are no navigable rivers or waterways, or air travel lanes or airports within the City. Thus, there will be no impacts upon these issues. The closest airports are the Bermuda Dunes Airport, a small private facility located just south of Interstate 10, approximately six miles north of the project site and the Thermal Airport, located approximately six miles southeast of the project. on Airport Boulevard in the Thermal area (Sources: La Quinta MEA, USGS La Quinta 7.5' Quad Map; Site Survey). 3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental.Setting The City of La Quinta lies within the Colorado Desert regional environment. Two ecosystems are found within the City, the Sonoran Desert Scrub and the Desert Transition. The disturbed environments within the City are classified as either urban or agricultural. A detailed discussion of these ecosystems is found in the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (1992). Local Environmental.Serting The project site is located in the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem. Typically, undeveloped land within this ecosystem is rich in biological resources and habitat. However, the project site has been disturbed by agriculture and mass grading in the distant and recent past. The Sonoran Desert Scrub is the most typical environment found in the Coachella Valley. It is generally categorized as containing plants which have the ability to economize water uses. go dormant during periods of drought, or both. Cacti are very common in these areas due to their ability to store water. Other plants root deeply and draw upon water from considerable depths. The variations of desert vegetation result from differences in the availabilitv of water. The most dense and lush vegetation in the desert is found where groundwater is most plentiful. The Sonoran Scrub areas are considered habitat for a number of small mammals. These animals escape the summer heat through their nocturnal and /or burrowing tendencies. ob2 Squirrels, mice and rats are all common rodent species in this environment. The black - tailed hare is a typical mammal. Predator species include kit fox, coyote, and mountain lion in the higher elevations. The largest mammal species found in this area is the Peninsular Bighorn sheep which is found at the higher elevations of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountain ranges. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the Sonoran Scrub area. The Desert Transition areas are found in the alluvial fan areas and slopes of the surrounding mountains. The transition is gradual and involves an intermingling of vegetation types typically found in the Desert Scrub ecosystem and the Pinon-Juniper Woodland near the top of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The plant species in the desert transition zone benefit from slightly higher rainfall. Where creosote bush and bur -sage dominated in the desert scrub areas, cacti become more abundant and ocotillo dominate on the upper portions of alluvial fans, bajadas, and rocky mountain slopes. The La Quinta General Plan identifies the property as being within the habitat of the Fringe -toed Lizard. In addition, there have been sightings of the endangered plant. California ditaXIr, in the general area of the project (Sources: Site Survey, La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project result in impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment identifies the project site as within the habitat of the Coachella Valley Fringe Toed Lizard, and the California ditaxis. The project site is not within the mitigation fee area for the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan, even though a portion of the project area is within the lizard's traditional habitat. There is no required mitigation for this species for this project. The California ditaxis is considered a "Species of Special Concern" and the State of California has ranked the plant "Endangered." The property has been highly disturbed since 1902 when date trees, and later citrus trees, were planted on the property. Over the years, the agricultural use of the property expanded. In 1988, the Coachella Valley Water District constructed flood control facilities on the project site which involved mass grading. Due to the extensive and lengthy disturbance of the property, no natural undisturbed plant communities remain on the property. The Prairie Falcon has been observed in the Santa Rosa Mountains to the south of this project site. The falcon is listed as a Species of Special Concern. The California desert is thought to support the largest remaining falcon population although new sightings have not been noted in the La Quinta area in recent years (Source: EA 92-240). The Bighorn Sheep have also been sighted in the Santa Rosa Mountain Range, of which the Coral Reef Mountains are a part of The Bureau of Land Management Santa Rosa UFi3 0 0 Mountains Wildlife Habitat Management Plan states that the largest population of Peninsular Bighorn Sheep is found in the Santa Rosa Mountains. The plan requires that the public use must be adjusted to minimize impacts on the wildlife habitat area. Summer bighorn use; areas. particularly those around water sources, are the most sensitive to human impacts. This project is north of the BLM habitat area, thus there are no anticipated impacts to the bighorn sheep from the proposed project. So as not to create barriers across habitat corridors for migrating species, development of this property should be limited to areas within the residentially -zoned district with no development in the Hillside Conservation designated areas. The mountainous areas should be retained as open space and either managed by the City or a non-profit organization. The hillside areas should not be fenced in order to permit access across the open space areas by native and migrating wildlife (Source: EA 92-240), B. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? Less Than Significant Impact. There are no locally designated biological resources within the City of La Quinta. All significant biological resources are designated by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Source: La Quinta AEA). There is a wind row of several large eucalyptus trees along Old Avenue 52 that are of historic significance. Staff has required that a qualified arborist evaluate the trees for preservation and incorporation into the project. The project proposes to remove the dead trees and retain about 14 trees. C. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? No impact. There are no locally designated natural communities found in or near the project site. Some of the surrounding parcels are developed with homes, a golf course, or roadways. The parcels have been disturbed by off -road vehicles and farming activities to the extent that there are no existing or relic plant communities left (Source: La Quinta MEA. Site Survey). D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? No Impact. There are no natural wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal pools on the project site or nearby. It is possible that during the last stand of the ancient Lake Cahuilla. the project site might have been within a marsh community along the lakeshore or may have been partially inundated by the lake. However. the lake dried approximately 500 years ago and the land has been dry since. The project site has become covered by sedentary deposits since the prehistoric lake dried (Sources: Site Survey; La Quinta MEA; Draft Historic Context Statement for City of La Quinta). E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 9 0 Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is surrounded by developed parcels on these sides which have effectively cut off migration corridors to and from the project site except to and from the Coral Reef Mountains. Wildlife corridors are still open in the Coral Reef Mountains which provide access to the higher mountains to the south. (Source: La Quinta MEA, Site Survey). 3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Regional ,Environmental Setting The Citv of La Quinta contains both areas of insignificant and significant Mineral Aggregate; Resource Areas (SMARA), as designated by the State Department of Conservation. There are no known oil resources in the City. Major energy resources used in La Quinta come from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), Southern California Gas Company, and various gasoline companies. Local Environmental. Setting There art: no oil wells or other fuel or energy producing facilities or resources on or near the project site. While the project site is undeveloped, there is no significant resource to be mined, such as rock or gravel. The project site is located within MRZ-I and MRZ-3. The MRZ-I designation is applied to those areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral despots are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. The MRZ-3 designation is for those areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data. The northern portion of the project is within an area of Prime Agricultural Soils (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site Survey). A. Would the project conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have an adopted energy plan. However, the City does have a Transportation Demand Management ordinance in place that focuses on the conservation of fuel and travel to large commercial centers. The Housing Element contains requirements for efficiency in housing construction and materials, thus reducing energy consumption. Future development will be required to meet Title 24 energy requirements. B. Would the project use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? Less Than Significant Impact. Natural resources that may be used by this proposed project include air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, and other resources needed for construction and operation. Title 24 requirements shall be complied with for ener_ev conservation. Any landscaping will also be required to comply with the City s 9 r landscape water conservation ordinance as well as the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District (Source: La Quinta MEA. Water Conservation Ordinance; Coachella Valley Water District). 3.9 RISK OF UPSETIHUMAN HEATH Regional Environmental Setting Recent growth pressure has dramatically increased the City's exposure to hazardous materials. Such exposure to toxic materials can occur through the air, in drinking water, in food, in drugs and cosmetics, and in the work place. Although large scale, hazardous waste generating employment is not yet present in the City of La Quinta, the existence of chemicals utilized in dry cleaning operations, agricultural operations, restaurant kitchen cleaning, landscape irrigation and exposure to large scale electrical facilities may pose significant threats to various sectors of the population. Currently, there are no hazardous disposal waste sites located in Riverside County, although transportation of such material out of, and around, La Quinta takes place. Local Environmental Setting In order to comply with AB 2948-Hazardous Waste Management Plans and Facility Siting Procedures, the City of La Quinta adopted Ordinance 184 consisting of a Hazardous Waste Management Plan. The project site has not been used for any type of manufacturing or industry, and there has not been any known dumping of hazardous substances on the property (Sources: Site Survey; Aerial Photos). A. Would the project involve a risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including not limited to oil, pesticides, chemical, or radiation)? Less Than Significant Impact. There is a minimal risk of exposure from swimming pool chemicals and pesticides that may be used by residents of the future homes within the project. No other risks are anticipated by the land division, future custom homes, clubhouse, or other proposed structures. B. Would the project involve possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities will be confined to the project site, except for minimal off -site work -as is necessary for project roadways, curbs, and gutters. These activities will not be permitted to interfere with emergency responses to the site or surrounding areas nor will it obstruct emergency evacuation of the area. Needed measures to divert and control traffic shall be implemented whenever required (Source: Site Plan). Emergencv accesses will be required for the project to meet the requirements of the Fire Department. C� Ll C. Would the project involve the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? No impact. There are no anticipated health hazards associated with the proposed project bevond tl;ose normally associated with a construction project (Source: Site Plan). D. Would the project involve exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? No Impact. There are no identifiable health hazards on the project site. The proposed development is not expected to create any health hazards. Future development will be required to conform to zoning standards and all applicable health and safety codes. E. Would the proposal involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project site is on an alluvial fan with sparse natural vegetation due to disturbance from previous mass grading for the flood control facilities on the project site. The adjacent mountains have only very sparse vegetation. The dead eucalyptus trees along Old Avenue 52 will be removed. Thus, there is a very low fire potential from brush, grass, or trees. 3.10 '�'.)1SE Regional Environmental.Setting Noise levels in the City are created by a variety of sources within and outside the City boundaries. The major sources of noise include vehicles on City streets and Highway I l 1, and temporary construction noise. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along the highway and major arterial roadways. Local Environmental Setting The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from Washine:ton Street and Avenue 52. Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the nighttime hours. The nearest residential use is located adjacent to the east and north of the project site. The State Building Code requires that interior noise level in buildings do not exceed CNEL 45. The General Plan of the City of La Quinta requires that exterior noise levels do not exceed CNEL 60 (Sources: Site Survey). A noise study has been prepared for this project. 9 9 A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. An acoustical study of the project site were conducted in December, 1996, by Gordon Bricken & Associates. The reports state that noise levels are dominated by vehicular traffic on Avenue 52 to the north, and Avenida Bermudas to the west. No other significant sources of noise were noted during the site visit. The report discusses the design of the proposed project and recommends mitigation measures to protect the proposed homes from street noise. Mitigation includes the construction of at least a 6 foot solid wall along the perimeter of the project, and constructing to meet certain criteria to ensure an outdoor -to -indoor noise intrusion of no greater than 45 dBA. These criteria are contained in the acoustical study and shall be made pan of the Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the project (Source: Gordon Bricken & Associates 1996). The height of residential lot pads is subject to sound attenuation along Avenida Bermudas. In order to ensure compliance with the recommendation of the acoustical study, the pad elevations on several lots have been reduced. There is an existing single family house located at 51-485 Calle Guatemala that abuts the project site along the northern property line. This house is constructed either on the lot line or possibly over the lot line. In order to mitigate this issue, the applicant will be required to process a lot line adjustment to provide a five-foot setback for the Calle Guatemala property. The perimeter wall which will be constructed along the entire length of the piroject's northern boundary would then have a five-foot "jog" in the wall at the Calle Guatemala property. The wall will not only define the project's boundaries, but will serve to mitigate sound attenuation impacts. B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta General Plan regulates excessive noise and vibration in the City by establishing allowable noise levels for various land uses. Residential land uses should have a maximum exterior noise level of up to 60 CNEL. If the ambient noise level is higher than this standard, then it will serve as the standard. The existing CNEL along Washington Street, Avenue 52, and Avenida Bermudas corridors adjacent to the project site is 60+ dBA. The interior of the project site, next to Ave. Bermudas, is between 50 and 60 dBA for that area close to the Coral Reef Mountains is less than 50 dBA (Source: La Quinta MEA). The proposed development will result in short-term impacts associated with construction activities. During construction, heavy machinery will be capable of generating periodic peak noise levels ranging from 70 to 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source. These high noise levels are short in duration and temporary with the construction phases of the project. Such high noise levels are not anticipated nor permitted after construction, or during the "operation" of the development (Source: La Quinta General Plan). It is possible that blasting may be necessary to grade those areas in the higher fan and slopes to create pads sites and golf tee boxes (Leighton and Associates 1986). However, the 1 RG t developer has stated in a letter to the City that blasting will not be used during grading. Blasting will be prohibited for this project. 3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES Regional Environmental &tting La w enforcement services are provided to the City through a contract with the Riverside Countv Sheriffs Department. The Sheriffs Department extends service to the City from existing facilities located in the City of Indio. There is a small substation located within City Hall, The Department utilizes a planning standard of 1.5 deputies per 1,000 population to forecast additional public safety personnel requirements in La Quinta at buildout. Based on this standard, the City should have a police force of 25.5 officers, but is currently underserved. Currently, there are three officers per shift with three staggered shifts per day to serve La Quinta. In addition to patrol, there is also a target team, Community Services Officer, and School Resources Officer assigned to the City (Source: 101-301 Police Services Supporting Information). Fire protection service is provided to the City by Riverside County Fire Department through a contractual arrangement. The Fire Department administers two stations in the City; Station 432 on Frances Hack Lane, west of Washington Street, and Station 970, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. The Fire Department is also responsible for building and business inspections, plan review, and construction inspections. Based upon a planning standard of one paid firefighter per 1,000 population, the City is currently underserved (Source: La Quinta MEA). Currently, there are two paid firefighters per shift at each of the two fire stations in La Quinta. Volunteers supplement the paid staff (Source: La Quinta Building & Safety Department). Structural fires and fires from other man-made features are the most significant fire threats to the City Hillside and brush fires are minimal as the hillside areas are virtually barren and the scattered brush on the valley floor is too sparse to pose a serious fire threat. Both the Desert Sands Unified School District and the Coachella Valley Unified School District serve the City. There is one elementary school, one middle school, and one high school within the City. Another elementary school is under construction within the City. The City is also within the College of the Desert Community College District. Library services are provided by the Riverside County Library System with a branch library located in the Village area of the City. The existing facility opened in 1988 and unadopted planning standards of 0.5 square feet per capita and 1.2 volumes per capita to forecast future facility requirements to serve the City. Utilizing this 1992 standard, the City was underserved in space but overserved in terms of volumes (Source: La Quinta MEA). 1) 6.3 Health care services are provided in the City through JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio, and the Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility in the I I Center. The Eisenhower Medical Center is located in Rancho Mirage. The Riverside County Health Department administers a varietv of health programs for area residents and is located in Indio. Paramedic service is provided to the City by Springs Ambulance Service. Local Environmental Setting The nearest City fire station to the project site is Station 432 located at the northwest corner of the project site. Goverrunental services in La Quinta are provided by City staff at the Civic Center, and by other County, state, and federal agency offices located in the desert area or region. The project site will be serviced by the local schools. A. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered governmental services in relation to fire protection? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will increase the need for fire protection due to the construction of residential units, a clubhouse, and other facilities. Development of the project shall comply with the fire flow and fire safety building standards of the Riverside County Fire Code to prevent fire hazard on -site and to minimize the need for fire protection services. Unobstructed fire access will be required through the design of the project streets and setbacks between structures. Other code requirements (such as sprinkler systems, construction materials, etc.) shall be complied with (Source: Fire Department). B. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered government services in relation to police protection? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Comments have been received by the Sheriff's Department for this project. There will be a cumulative impact upon police protection services by the construction of new residential units that will generate calls for various types of police services and protection. Traffic collisions, patrol requests, and calls for service will impact the Sheriffs Department. This will generate a need for additional staff in, the future. C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to school services? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A response was received from the Desert Sands Unified School District, dated October 24, 1996. The letter states that the proposed project will potentially result in an impact on their school system. School overcrowding is a District -wide concern for Desert Sands. The District's ability to meet the educational needs of the public with new schools has been seriously impaired in recent years by local, h %11 state, and federal budget cuts that have had a devastating impact on the financing of new schools. The school mitigation fee that is currently collected on all new development at the time building permits are issued will be required of this project (Source: DSUSD letter of October 24, 1996). D. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to the maintenance of public facilities, including roads? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The project site is not served by existing, but limited infrastructure connected with the past ranching operation. The proposed project will not require new and altered services for the maintenance of roadways or other facilities, as internal streets will be private. Additional public roads at the entrances to the projects will require maintenance by the City, which may impact current staff and budget concerns. E. W'ould the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to other governmental services? Less Than Significant Impact. Building, engineering, inspection, and planning review needed f'or the proposed project will be partially offset by application, permit and inspection fees charged to the applicant and contractors. 3.12 UTILITIES Regional Environmenral.Services The City of La Quinta is served by the Imperial Irrigation District (ID)) for electrical power supply and The Gas Company (TGC) for natural gas service. Existing power and gas lines and substations are found throughout the City. IID has four substations in La Quinta, with electricity generated by a steam plant in El Centro and hydroelectric power generated by the All American Canal. General Telephone Exchange (GTE) provides telephone services for the City. Colony Cablevision serves the area for cable television service. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides water and sewer service to the City. CVWD obtains its water from underground aquifers and from the Colorado River. CVWD operates a water system with potable water pumped from domestic water wells in the City. The wells range in depth from 500 to 900 feet. Potable water is stored in five reservoirs located in the City. The City's stormwater drainage system is administered by the CVWD, which maintains and operates a comprehensive system to collect and transport flows through the City. The City is served by Waste Management of the Desert for solid waste disposal. Nonhazardous. mixed municipal solid waste is taken to three landfills within the Coachella Valley. Local Environmental.Setting The project is adjacent to developed areas on the west, north, and east. The site is former farm land that has been under cultivation until recent years. A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to power and gas service? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Power, sewer, and natural gas lines have been brought in to the community and are available to the project site. It is not anticipated that the project will require a significant level of electricity or natural gas to result in the need for new systems or alterations to existing systems. The project developer will have to coordinate with IID. CVWD, cable company, and TGC for the timely provision of utilities. A response letter from IID, dated October 28, 1996, was received by the City. The letter states that the proposed project will impact electric service to the area. The cumulative impact of projects of this size do increase the electrical demand on the IID's existing facilities at peak leading periods, and result in the need for additional generation, transmission, substation, and distribution facilities. When additional facilities are needed, projects of this magnitude directly impact power rates in the IID's service area and may result in higher electric rates in the future years (Source: IID letter dated October 28, 1996). B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to communication systems? Less Titan Significant Impact. The proposed development will require service from General Telephone Exchange (GTE) for telephone communication. The developer will be required to coordinate the installation of telephone service infrastructure with GTE. A fiber optic cable is located along Old Avenue 52. This cable will need to be relocated prior to grading in that area. Relocation is the responsibility of the applicant (Source' Richard Tyree, GTE: Jan. 2, 1997). C. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will require water service. It is not anticipated that the project will result in a significant adverse impact upon the water resources of CVWD, with the construction of new facilities, including wells, reservoirs, and booster pumping stations. The developer will be required to provide land on which some of these facilities will be located. Potable water consumption has been discussed in • 9 section 3.4 of this document. A response letter from CVWD has been received that states that the district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to the project. The project will be required to be annexed into Improvement District No. 55 to obtain sanitation service (Source: CVWD letter dated November 14, 1996). D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to sewer services or septic tanks? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will generate sewage which will have to be transported and treated by CVWD. The developer will be responsible for the cost of connection and installation of an on -site sewer system. A response from CVWD has been received. See discussion above in subsection D (Source: CVWD letter dated November 14, 1996). E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to storm water drainage? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is vacant farm land. The project will result in substantial construction of buildings, pavement and landscaping. Additional on - site retention facilities will be required for the development of the project. The Whitewater River Storm channel is located approximately 3 miles south of the project site. There will be no sienificant impacts to the channel (Source: Site Survey, La Quinta General Plan). F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to solid waste disposal? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will require solid waste disposal services from Waste Management of the Desert, the current purveyor of solid waste collection. Solid waste may be transported to the three existing landfills in the Coachella Vallev. These landfills are reaching capacity and may be closed in the near future. Development must comply with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling policies. However, other sites or alternative types of waste disposal projects are being considered. Any on -site programs will be coordinated with Waste Management. Solid waste generation is calculated at 4.00 lbs. per person per day (La Quinta General Plan). 3.13 .%ESTHETICS Regional Environmental. Setting The City of La Quinta is partially located within a desert valley cove. There are hillsides to the west and south of the Citv. Views of the desert and surrounding mountains are visible on clear days throughout most of the City. (173 Local Environmental Setting The project site is located in a predominately residential zoned area in the southern portion of the City. The Cove residential area immediately to the west, allows a maximum of 17 feet for a single family residence. The proposed project site is in the RL district that allows up to 28 feet in height with the exception for houses along Ave. Bermudas which will be restricted to 17 feet height limitation. Views from the project site consists of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains to the south and southeast, the alluvial fan area to the southwest, and the open valley floor to the north and northeast (Source: Site Survey; La Quinta MESA). A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within designated viewshed No 1, which includes both distinctive and attractive types of viewsheds. The vistas from the project site include the Coral Reef Mountains adjacent to the east and south, the Santa Rosa Mountains to the south and west, and the valley floor to the northeast. Less than significant impacts are anticipated by this project as the majority of proposed development will be located on the gently sloping alluvial fan area (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site Survey). The applicant has submitted a viewshed study of the six residential lot area and tee boxes ff17, 2, and 18, as required for the Conditional Use Permit. The six lots are proposed, for an alluvial fan within the Coral Reef Mountains. Slopes vary widely within this alluvial fan. The fan was scarred by construction activities by the CVWD, in 1988, when nearby flood control facilities were constructed. There is a distinct color difference created by the scarring. The proposed six lots on this fan will in effect eliminate the scarring through proposed development and restoration of any remaining scarring. B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be required to comply with architectural and landscaping policies and ordinances of the City in effect at the time of development. It is possible that the alluvial fan where six residential lots are proposed for approval under Conditional Use Permit 96-031 would have a negative impact upon the local environment as the proposed street to access these lots would result in a 10-foot scar wall in one area where the road is proposed to be constructed over an elevated ridge line. Staff has determined that there is an opportunity to realign the road off the ridge line to a lower area to prevent the scar wall and keep development out of the 20% slope areas. The realignment of this road will be a condition of approval for the Conditional Use Permit. The six proposed lots under the Conditional Use Permit also have small portions of the lots within the 20% or greater slope areas. Development is not permitted above 20% slope. However, those lots that have small areas at the rear within 20% or greater slopes will be required to have conservation easements recorded on them, with no grading permitted in these areas. The applicant will have to redesign the grading plan for this area to eliminate all grading in areas above 20% slope gradient. The grading on the six lots will 0: ;., 1, I be required to avoid flat planes in order to soften the impact of grading. Grading will only be permitted within that area that was previously scarred by CVWD flood control construction activities on the alluvial fan. All areas graded on the alluvial fan are subject to restoration of existing or project -related scarring. The applicant will be conditioned to revise the slope study to include a dashed line indicating the limits of the existing scarred area. Any modifications to the alluvial fan area subject to Conditional Use Permit 96-031 will require a revision to the CUP, subject to the environmental and public hearing process. The 15 foot slope between lots 230, 231, 232, and the lower road will be required to be landscaped to soften the visual impact of the grading. C. Would the project create light or glare? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed project will include exterior securitv and low level landscaping lighting which will cumulatively contribute to the existing light and glare in the City. All such lighting fixtures shall be required to comply with the Dark Sky Ordinance and other policies of the City, in order to reduce the impact. A lighting plan will be required to be submitted for review and approval for the proposed development. 3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting A portion of the prehistory of the La Quinta area is known through the archaeological record gained from various archaeological investigations over the past twenty years and from extensive ethnographic information. A discussion of the prehistory and history of La Quinta is provided in the Draft Historic Context Statement of the City of La Quinta. Other discussions are found in the La Quinta General Plan and the Master Environmental Assessment. Local E'nvironmental.Setting The project site is located in the southern portion of the City. There are recorded archaeological sites within a one mile radius of the project site as well as sites on the project site. The project site was previously surveyed for archaeological or historical resources, with both archaeological or historical sites recorded on the property. In 1984, the first archaeological investigation took place on the project site in conjunction with a similar proposed golf course/country club project. This Phase I investigation was conducted by UCR ARU. Six archaeological sites were recorded at that time. Local Native .American consultation for these sites was included in the analysis and determination of mitigation measures to be required for the sites. • 0 As mitigation for the archaeological sites for the project under review at that time, an extensive Phase II investigation was conducted in 1989, by UCR ARU, to test several of the sites and determine their perimeters and significance. Eleven human cremations were recovered from site Riv-1179, as well as numerous artifacts. The additional mitigation for this site was determined to be capping in order to preserve the remaining subsurface deposits and to memorialize the burial ground. The six sites found on the project site are connected with a prehistoric village area, located partially on the property. Over the past years there has been frequent looting of the sites and casual pothunting by people trespassing onto the property. In 1988, the Coachella Valley Water District undertook construction of a large detention basin, drainage channels, and related flood control facilities on the project site. In the Environmental Assessment prepared by CVWD, the archaeological resources were not given consideration (CVWD File No. 0121.3198). At least two of the archaeological sites were destroyed at that time by the water district's actions. There is no record of archaeological monitoring or other mitigation by CVWD at that time. Thus, two of the sites are lost. The remaining sites consist of bedrock milling stations located at the toe of the slope. These site can easily be preserved and incorporated into the project as cultural features, and thus preserved. Riv-1179 was capped by Keith Companies archaeologists Paul G. Chace. Ph.D., and Charles Reeves, J.D., in December 1996. The capping consisted of carefully placing at least three feet of clean, fine sand over the top of the designated site area. The heavy equipment did not touch the site area. The capping was photodocumented. Annual inspections of the capped site will be required by the City staff to ensure the stability and proper maintenance of the capping. The capped site will be required to have a conservation easement placed on it with the deed going to the City in perpetuity. The site will be preserved for the sensitive memorial of the human remains and for future scientific study. A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources? Less Than Significant Impact. It is known that marine -associated paleontological resources are found at elevations below 42 feet above mean sea level. The proposed project site is located at elevations ranging between 42 and 1600 feet above MSL. Thus, it was determined that the project site was just outside of the area designated by the Lakebed Paleontological Determination Study. The project site will have archaeological monitoring of the earth -moving activities, which will provide for a contingency in the event that paleontological resources are uncovered as well (Source: Lakebed Paleontological Determination Study, Wilke 1984; UCR ARU 1986). B. Would the project affect archaeological resources? Less Than Significant Impact. There are numerous archaeological sites within close proximity of the proposed project. The archaeological survev conducted on the project site did locate and record six prehistoric archaeological sites. A discussion of these sites and their current status is provided above. Because of the potential for subsurface cultural 0 i deposits, it is recommended that archaeological monitoring during the clearing and grubbing, grading and trenching of the project should be done for all on -site and project - related offsite work (Source: Wilke 1984; UCR ARU 1986). C. Would the project affect historical resources? Potential Impact Unless Mitigated. There are historical resources located and documented on the project site. The resources consist of the Hacienda Del Gato and related buildings. In addition there are fixtures related to the ranching operation of the property that are of historic age and significance. The property was purchased from the state by John and Belle Marshal in 1902. They established a date and citrus ranch and constructed a large hacienda -style home in the 1930's. The first structure on the ranch were a small adobe house, equipment barn, and later a caretakers house. The ranch is discussed in the City's Draft Historic Context Statement and documented in a focused historic investigation by Mellon and Associates, in November 1996. It has been determined that the hacienda and adjacent grounds are significant historic resources to the community and that every effort to preserve, rehabilitate and adapt the property is to be made. A Certificate of Appropriateness was applied for by the applicant to seek approval of various treatments to the hacienda, and the surrounding grounds, from the City. The proposed treatments are independent from the project in that they can stand alone even if the project is never constructed, and that they further the goal of preservation of an important historic resource. Certificate of Appropriateness 96-001 was recommended for City Council approval by the Historic Preservation Commission on January 16, 1997. (Sources: La Quinta Historical Society; La Quinta General Plan; La Quinta MEA; Mellon and Associates 1996). In December 1996, The Keith Companies documented Old Avenue 52,which had been identified by staff as a potential historic road. The Historic Preservation Commission concluded that the road was significant as a historic resource, however, due to the loss of the road's integrity, this resource does not warrant preservation or additional mitigation beyond the documentation prepared by the consultant. D. Would the project have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic values? No Impact. There is no identifiable unique ethnic value to the proposed project site. The project site has been a ranch that was first established in 1902. However, development of the property has been anticipated and promoted since the early 1980's. The historic house and grounds will be preserved and incorporated into the proposed development. There are no unique ethnic values identified with the property, other than local historic and prehistoric significance. E. Would the project restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? No impact. There are no known current religious uses or sacred uses on the proposed project site. The archaeological investigation for the project transmitted letters of inquiry �7 , • 0 to the local tribal councils requesting their comment of this and other issues. No responses were received. 3.15 RECREATION Regional Environmental Setting The Citv of La Quinta has an adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan that assesses the existing resources and facilities and the future needs of the City. The City has approximately 28.7 acres of developed parkland for Quimby Act purposes. The 845 acre regional Lake Cahuilla Park is not included in this count. There are also unimproved bike and equestrian corridors within the City and designated pedestrian hiking trails. Local Environmental Setting The project site is former farm land with an historic house and out -buildings. There is no evidence that there have been any organized or approved recreational uses on the property The proposed project includes an 18-hole golf course that will provide recreation to the country club members. A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed project will impact the existing park and recreation facilities by the construction of 241 new residential lots. Park fees in lieu of parkland dedication will be required for this project in order to mitigate this impact upon local. parks. The Parks and Recreation Master Plan states that Planning Area C, within which the project site is located, is significantly deficient in park and recreation facilities. The paying of the parkland fee will assist in acquiring the necessary funds to develop future parks and other recreation facilities in Planning Area C (Sources: Parks and Recreation Master Plan). B. Would the project affect existing recreational opportunities? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed project of 241 residential lots will affi:ct existing parks and recreation facilities through added users. There is a significant deficit in existing parks in the northern area of the City. However, the Fritz B. Burns Park is located at the northwest corner of the project site. Added users would result in an increased demand upon the existing park facilities and recreational programs. Payment of the parkland fee will mitigate this impact by contributing funds toward the construction of new park facilities and added recreational programs. 0 • SECTION 4: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The proposed project will not have unmitigable significant adverse impacts on the environmental issues addressed in the checklist and addendum. Some of the issue areas could have a potential significant impact if appropriate mitigation measures are not implemented. The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings of significance set forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines and based on the results of this environmental assessment: x The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures. The proposed project will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation of mitigation. The proposed project will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned for proposed development in the immediate vicinity. x The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation of mitigation. SECTION 5: EARLIER ANALYSES A. Earlier Analyses Used. In 1992, EA 92-240 was prepared for Tentative Tract Map 27613. The current proposed project site is the same location encompassed by Tentative; Tract 27613. EA 92-240 assessed the potential impacts to the environment from the project proposed at that time. That project consisted of 399 residential units and an 18-hole golf course, and was known as The Traditions. Much of the general environmental information on resources and hazards assessed in 1992 is still valid for the current proposed project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified for that assessment. Also utilized in the current analysis was the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (MEA), prepared in 1991, in conjunction with the 1992 General Plan Update and related EIR. The special studies prepared for the proposed project consist of. Preliminary Soil Investigation of Tract 20328, La Quinta, California. November 1984. Buena Engineers, Inc. 11 i 2. Grading Plan Review, Tract 20328, City of La Quinta, California. July 3. 1986. Leighton and Associates. 3. La Quinta Stormwater Project. Coachella Valley Water District - Design Report. April 1989. Bechtel Civil, Inc. 4. Update of Geotechnical Engineering Report. October 10, 1996. Earth Systems Consultants. 5. Hydrology/Hydraulic Report for the Tradition Golf Course Project in the City of La Quinta, Tentative Tract 27613. October 1996. Keith International, Inc. 6. An Archaeological Assessment of the Burns Ranch and Adjacent Properties, La Quinta, Riverside County, California. Philip J. Wilke, Ph.D., June 1994. 7. Archaeological Investigations at La Quinta, Salton Basin, Southeastern California. Mark Q. Sutton and Philip J. Wilke, Editors. September 1986. 8. Acoustical Analysis: Tract 12480 (sic), City of La Quinta. Gordon Bricken & Associates, December 13, 1996. 9. USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Coachella Valley. 1979. 10. Marshall Ranch/Hacienda del Gato Historic Resource Evaluation. Mellon and Associates. November 1996. 11. Environmental Documents for the La Quinta Stormwater Project (File No. 0121.3198 and 0121.3198.1), Coachella Valley Water District. February 12, 1985. ll2. Historic Resource Evaluation Report, The Old Avenue 52, City of La Quinta. Paul G. Chace, The Keith Companies, December 1996. B. Impacts Adequately Addressed. The archaeological issues have been thoroughly addressed in the archaeological reports for the project site. All other potential impact/issue areas are considered to be adequately addressed with this environmental assessment. Certification of this EA by the City Council will confirm the adequacy of the environmental assessment. C. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures are discussed in this addendum as they relate to the proposed project. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan containing these measures will be included as part of the Environmental Assessment and project conditions of approval. 081 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A THIRTEEN LOT SUBDIVISION AND MISCELLANEOUS AMENITY LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY 5.39 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTH TERMINUS OF WASHINGTON STREET TAKING ACCESS FROM DEL GATO DRIVE WITHIN THE TRADITION CLUB CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30056 APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 27`h day of February, 2001, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and to consider the request of Chapman Golf Development, L. L.C. for approval of a Tentative Tract Map as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: LOTS 115-121 OF TRACT 28867; 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 Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify said Tentative Tract Map 30056: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan. The project is a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the General Plan; therefore, all provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) shall be met. Tentative Tract Map 30056 is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with the General Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences pursuant to Environmental Assessment (EA) 96-333. B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and the Subdivision Ordinance. All streets and improvements in the project conform to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as designed. Access for the single family lots will be provided from a street built under the tentative tract map. A:\TT30066\PC RESO TT 30056.wpd 7 , 0 8 2 Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Tentative Tract Map 30056 February 27, 2001 The design of the proposed lots is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan in that the subdivision has on -site drainage, flood water retention, and internal circulation system acceptable to the City Engineer. C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development in that the slope and topographic relief is acceptable, and the soil type is suitable for residential development. D. The diesign of the lots, or type of improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially and unavoidably injure fish, or wildlife, or their habitats in that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified for EA 96-333 April 1, 1997. An Addendum has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with minor changes in the project. The Community Development Department has determined that no significant environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated will result from this project. Therefore, no further environmental documentation is necessary. E. The design of the lot, or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems in that the Fire Marshall, Sheriff's Department, and the City's Building and Safety Department have reviewed the proposal for public health conditions and the project is conditioned as appropriate. F. The design of the lot, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision in the proposed internal streets will be priivately owned and maintained, and that there will be no publicly -owned improvements with the tentative tract map. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map 30059 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 27`h day of February, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: 083 AATT30066\PO RESO TT 30056.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Tentative Tract Map 30056 February 27, 2001 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERfVIAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California 0. H81) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 30056 FEBRUARY 27, 2001 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 tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. This tentative map and any final maps thereunder shall comply with the requirements and standards of §§66410 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC). 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. 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 r., 085 A:\TT30056\PC. COA.TT30056wpd.wpd or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. 5. Final maps under this tentative map shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of final map approval. pZiwaawml[":W0 6. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights required of the tentative map or otherwise necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of essential improvements. 7. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 8. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PRIVATE STREETS 1) Residential: 33-foot width. B. CULS DE SAC 1) Public or Private: Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset) with 38-foot radius, or larger. 9. Right of way geometry for knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 10. If the City Engineer determines that access rights to proposed street rights of way shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating the rights of way, the applicant shall grant the necessary rights of way within 60 days of written request by the City. 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,-1 (18J A:\TT30056\PC. (.OA. TT30056wpd. wpd 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. 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 15. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval of this tentative map by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer. 16. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. If the map was not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the map. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 17. 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 A:\TT30056\PC.COA.TT30056wpd.wpd ' 1) 8 7 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. 18. 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. 19. 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. IMPROVEMEN'i AGREEMENT 20. Depending on the timing of development of the lots or parcels created by this map and the status of off -site improvements at that time, the subdivider may be required to construct improvements, to construct additional improvements subject to reimbursement by others, to reimburse others who construct improvements that are obligations of this map, to secure the cost of the improvements for future construction by others, or a combination of these methods. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the City, the Applicant shall, at the time of approval of a map or other development or building permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements. 21. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 22. 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 #. 0 8 S A: \TT30056\PC. COA.TT30056wpd. wpd 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. 23. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (e.g., Site Development Permits), off -site improvements and common improvements (e.g., retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first phase unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase and subsequent phases unless a construction phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer. 24. 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 25. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been met. 26. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. r- 089 A: \TT30056\PC. COA.TT30056wpd. wpd 27. 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. 28. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a tract or parcel map, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. The limits given in this condition and the previous condition are not entitlements and more restrictive limits may be imposed in the map approval or plan checking process. If compliance with the limits is impractical, however, the City will consider alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 29. 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. 30. 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 otheir erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 31. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 32. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for Tract 28470. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner. 33. The tract shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. UTILITIES 34. 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, A: \TT30056\PC. COA.TT30056wpd. wpd and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 35. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND l-RAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 36. 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. PRIVATE STREETS 11 Residential: 33-foot width measured back of curb to back of curb. Width may be reduced to 28 feet with on -street parking prohibited if there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and the applicant provides for perpetual enforcement of the restrictions by the homeowners association. B. CULS DE SAC 1) Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset) with 38-foot curb radius, minimum. 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. 37. 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. 38. 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. 39. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. A:\TT30056\PC.COA.TT30056wpd.wpd +, 09i 40. 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. 41. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b. 42. 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. 43. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the tract or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. QUALITY ASS JRA�N 44. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 45. 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. 46. 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. A:\TT30056\PC. C:OA.TT30056wpd.wpd r. n92 47. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 48. 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. 49. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. FIRE MARSHALL 50. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding Fire Marshall conditions should be directed to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. A:\TT30056\PC.COA.TT30056wpd.wpd ATTACHMENT #1 AVE. z 50 CALLE AVE. TAMPICO 52 N PROJECT LOCATION VICINITY MAP N.T.S. 09ll ATTACHMENT #2 /\\A \ Au yi§ $ I r S@Rq Ar V' 9 I Ar Ir ' na H wwaa�awwcn v, i'e. v v `L ® - P" •,� �% _ a� 1C 03 JI i a ' ,w Sh @ S p glspss' C� i"r"' V, - g a �N W ZyIi� �tla 6E� EISENHOWER OR. �4 t wcx oa £ N � R� \ I � :' oigNiHs+M', :I Anry�'s HK � zB A A n •4 fl 68&. < I m I u { E a 4 . e c�s4 a € O [see 1 2 m m gaome aFP€ _ G d O ang g8€ k m p & R�aFill� � � m z o z ,u eH W CY r -� m 021123!2A01 10:15 8183418123 TOM TREINEN PAGE 02, Tom Treinen ATTACHMENT #3 10487 LarartHe Ave Chatsworth Ca 91311 j Tel: (BIB) 341.8123 Fax: (818) 34"123 Feb 23, 2001 City of La Quinta Community Development Department La Quirda CA 92253 Re: Chapman Golf Development LLC Tentative Tract Map 30056 Lots 115-121 of Tract 28867 Gentlemen., I am the owner of Lot 111, Tract 28867, address 53-840 Del Gato Dr. I am writing in opposition to the application of Chapman Golf Development LLC to amend the plan of subdivision by firrther subdividing seven current lots into thirteen lots. My reasons are as follows: I request a continuance of the Public Hearing scheduled for February 27, 2001 on the grounds that I did not receive sufficient notice. I received the notice on Feb 22, only after I called the Community Development Dept. (Betty Sawyer) and requested a copy. According to your office the county records list the Tradition Golf Association as the registered of my lot. This in itself disturbs me because I have owned the lot for almost 2 years. 2. I further oppose this application because the developer sold me the lot on the premise that there would be only 290 lots and therefore only 290 memberships (1 membership per lot). 3. I further oppose this application on the basis that the Developer chose not to present and give notice to the Tradition property owners of this proposed amendment. I believe this amendment changes the character of this community of large single family houses by adding condominiums or whatever Chapman Golf Development has in mind. This will diminsh the value and attractiveness of the entire Tradition community, and in particular the lots such as mine'that directly adjacent to my lot. For the above reasons and others that I may present at the hearing, I request that the City reject this application. -)-pox445 02-23-01 09:56 RECEIVED FROM:8183418123 P.02 PH #C STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2001 CASE NUMBERS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 89-110 AND TRACT MAP 24230 (AMENDMENT #1) APPLICANT: THE SPANOS COMPANIES LOCATION: EAST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET (APPROXIMATELY 2,289 LINEAL FEET) AND NORTH OF AVENUE 48 REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; AND 2) CREATION OF A LEFT -TURN ACCESS FROM WASHINGTON STREET ONTO LAKE LA QUINTA DRIVE BY MODIFICATION OF CONDITION #22(A) OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 89-85 ENGINEERS: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOC. AND ENDO ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: AN ADDENDUM TO THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 89-1 10) WAS PREPARED FOR THIS AMENDMENT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED (CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 83-63)• THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND THEREFORE, RECOMMENDS CERTIFICATION OF THE ADDENDUM. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: WASHINGTON STREET IS MAJOR ARTERIAL STREET (IMAGE CORRIDOR), 120-FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH RAISED LANDSCAPE MEDIAN STPC TR24230#1-47 GREG; R 2/14 & Ret 2/22 Page 1 of 3 SAC.KSROMD: Lake La_Quin-ta History Tract 24230 created Lake La Quinta, a gated community, consisting of approximately 281 single family home sites on 103 acres oriented around a 24-acre man-made lake and several commercial lots and a multi -family lot is generally bounded by Washington Street on the west, Adams Street on the east, Avenue 48 on the south and Avenue 47 on the north, but excluding property at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 47 (Attachment 1). Tract 24230 was approved by the City Council on July 5, 1989 with Condition #22(a) of Resolution 89-85 restricted Washington Street access to "right turns in and out only" turning movements. Tract 24230 divided approximately 22.58 acres along Washington Street into several lots for retail/office development. Lake La Quinta Drive provides direct access to Washington Street for Lake La Quinta property owners and the commercial properties. Signalized intersections on Washington Street serving this development are located at Avenues 47 and 48. Tract Amendment The applicant requests to amend Condition #22(a) of Tract 24230 to allow left-hand turn movements from Washington Street onto Lake La Quinta Drive in addition to right turns -in and right turns -out (Attachments 2-5)• A turn pocket for five vehicles and deceleration transition area in the 18-foot wide raised landscaped median is recommended at a minimum to facilitate queuing and safe harbor. This pocket would be located approximately 1,474 feet (0.279 miles) north of the intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 48 and is shown at 265' long. Public-NoSice: A public hearing notice was published in the Desert -Sun Newspaper on February 15, 2001, and mailed to Lake La Quinta property owners and those within 500-feet of the project site informing them of the hearing pursuant to the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance (Section 13.12.100). To date, no written correspondence has been received. Public Agency —Review: Staff mailed a copy of the applicant's request to all public agencies on February 1, 2001, for response by February 12. All comments have been incorporated into the attached draft Conditions of Approval, as appropriate. STATEUENLQ.E_MANDATORT FINDINGS: Findings necessary to recommend approval of this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolutions and Conditions of Approval. Please note all STPC TR24230#1-47 GREG; R 2/14 & Ret 2/22 conditions of the Tract are included in the attached Conditions of Approval even though the majority are completed. As this Amendment will serve as the current reference to Conditions of Approval, staff recommends this format for easier reference to past history (Condition #49). RECOMMENDATLON: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City Council certification of an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 89-1 10 for Tract 24230 (Amendment #1); and 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001- , recommending to the City Council approval of an amendment to Tract 24230, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1 . Tract Map Exhibit - Tr. 24230 2. Median Photo 3. Assessor's Map Page 4. Location Map 5. Median Map Exhibit 6. Large Maps - Planning Commission only Prepared by: STPC TR24230#1-47 GREG; R 2/14 & Ret 2/22 Submitted by: Cam' Christine di lorio, Planning M nager A.,J�, 099 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 89-110 PREPARED FOR TRACT 24230, AMENDMENT #1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 89-110 APPLICANT: THE SPANOS COMPANIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider an Addendum to EA 89-110 prepared for Tract 24230, Amendment #1, more particularly described as: Street Lots CC, D and E of Tract 24230; Portions of Section 30, TSS, R7E 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 Addendum to EA 89-1 10 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164; and WHEREAS, the Revised Project does not call for the preparation of a subsequent Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15162 or Public Resources Code Section 21166, in that the Revised Project does not involve: (1) substantial changes to the project analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) which would involve new significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the MND substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; or (3) new information of substantial importance which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the MND substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; and WHEREAS, on July 5, 1989, the La Quinta City Council certified a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map 24230 (Resolution 89-85) encompassing 151 acres, which allowed for 281 single family residential houses and a private lake, and miscellaneous commercial and multifamily parcels. WHEREAS, the Revised Project involves the reconstruction of the Washington Street median for left -turn movements into Lake La Quinta consistent with the policies of the General Plan Circulation Element in that this turn movement will A:vesopc EA413 Spanosmpd - 47 Greg T./Page 1 109 provide convenient access to south bound traffic desiring access to the commercial property along Washington Street. 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 certification of said Addendum: The proposed Amendment will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, as the project in question will not be developed in any manner inconsistent with the General Plan and other current City standards. The project does not have the potential to eliminate an important example of California prehistory, as extensive archaeological investigations of the site have been completed during construction of the existing street. 2. The proposed Washington Street left-hand turn pocket will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the adjacent properties on the west side of Washington based on the attached findings and conditions. 3. The proposed Amendment and related applications will not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, in that the proposed project is undertaken pursuant to the Tract Map Amendment for which a Mitigation Negative Declaration has been certified. 4. The proposed Amendment to Tract 24230 does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long- term environmental goals, as the project will improve traffic circulation by providing another point of access for the commercial properties on the east side of Washington Street. 5. The proposed Amendment and related applications will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, as the project contemplates a new left-hand turn pocket consistent with the City General Plan Circulation design standards. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Addendum to EA 89-110, a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2. That it does hereby recommends certification of an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 89-1 10 in that the changes proposed to the A:\resopc EA413 Spanosmpd - 47 Greg T./Page 2 0_J101 project are a minor nature and do not require the preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and there are no new circumstances which would require the preparation of a subsequent Negative Declaration and there is no new information or change in circumstances which would require the preparation of a subsequent MND. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 271h day of February, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HER AN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:vesopc EA413 Spanos.wpd - 47 Greg T./Page 3 1 " 2 0.J. U ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 89-110 FOR TRACT 24230, AMENDMENT #1 LAKE LA QUINTA The City of L.a Quinta, as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq. ("CEQA") has prepared this Addendum pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15164. This is an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration that the City prepared and certified in 1989 for the Lake La Quinta Development (i.e., TTM 24230 and ZC 89-037). The City Council certified the Mitigated Negative Declaration on July 5, 1989, in Resolution No. 89-85. A:\EA413CKLISTSPAN0S.wpd -47 Greg T - Page 1 y. j . 103 The purpose of this Addendum is to document certain changes to the project which will be implemented through the following approval: AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO TRACT 24230 This case is referred to as the "Revised Project." The Revised Project involves the installation of a southbound left -turn lane from Washington Street onto Lake La Quinta Drive, a mixed use development surrounding a 24-acre man-made lake. This access point is located approximately 1,474 feet north of the intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 48. The traffic analysis prepared for the proposed Amendment estimates that the turn lane should be designed for a minimum of five vehicles and deceleration areas. A copy of the traffic study, prepared by Endo Engineering, is on file with the Community Development Department. The ingress is planned for southbound Washington Street traffic onto Lake La Quinta Drive to facilitate access to the commercial sites and provide alternative access routes for Lake La Quinta residents. It is projected 133 vehicles will use this lane at build -out during peak hour periods assuming 54,000 vehicles trips per day on Washington Street. The design of the turn lane complies with City requirements, therefore it is not a significant impact. The City has compared the impacts of the Revised Project with those impacts analyzed in the previous Negative Declaration and finds as follows: Aesthetics - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The project will remove portions of the raised median on Washington St. to install the new left-hand turn lane. Impacts are minor in nature within the existing right-of-way. Existing landscaping will be removed and transplanted, as required. Agriculture Resources - Not applicable Hazards and Hazardous Materials - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Hydrology and Water Quality - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Water runoff will follow existing travel routes. Public Services - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Recreation - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Impact fees have been paid. A:\EA413CKLISTSPANOS.wpd -47 Greg T- Page 2 a •.; 1 U y Air Quality -Impacts - Impact no greater than those previously analyzed. Travel distances will be reduced. However, construction air quality impacts will be comparable to the project analyzed in 1989, and a Dust Control Plan shall be prepared before construction commences and permits are issued. Biological Resources - Not applicable because impact fees have been paid. Cultural Resources - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The master developer for Lake La Quinta has complied with the mitigation measures prescribed for CA RIV-1729 during excavation of the site ten years ago. Geology and Soils - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The geology and soil impacts remain unchanged from the studies that were submitted to the Public Works Department in 1990 prior to issuance of grading permits for site development improvements. Land Use Planning - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Mineral Resources - impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Noise - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Transportation/Traffic - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed based on recommendations of the Project's Traffic Study dated December 12, 2000 by Endo Engineering. Appropriate traffic signing will insure that conflicts between bicycle riders and vehicles will be limited as recommended in the project's conditions. Utilities and Service Systems - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. Population and Housing - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The City finds that consideration of the Revised Project does not call for the preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15162 or A:\EA413CKLISTSPANOS.wpd -47 Greg T - Page 3 105 Public Resources Code Section 21166, in that the Revised Project does not involve: (1) substantial changes to the project analyzed in the prior Negative Declaration which would involve new significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; or (3) new information of substantial importance which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration increase the severity of previously identified impacts. °-) -10 0 AAEA413CKLI STSPANOS.wpd -47 Greg T - Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO TRACT 24230 TO ALLOW A LEFT -TURN LANE ONTO LAKE LA QUINTA DRIVE FROM WASHINGTON STREET CASE NO.: TRACT 24230, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: THE SPANOS COMPANIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27`h day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of The Spanos Companies for approval to amend Condition #22(a) of City Council Resolution 89-85 for Tract 24230 (Amendment #1) to allow left-hand turn access from southbound Washington Street onto Lake La Quinta Drive in the Regional Commercial (RC) and Low Density Residential (LDR) Zone Districts, more particularly described as: Street Lots CC, D and E of Tract 24230; Portions of Section 30, T5S, R7E WHEREAS, the application 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 Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 89-110); and WHEREAS, the development of Lake La Quinta has been in compliance with the mitigation measures imposed under Tract 24230 pursuant City Council Resolution 89-85 adopted on July 5, 1989. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said Tract 24230, Amendment #1: 1 . The proposed Amendment is consistent with the General Plan in that the turn pocket access will assist traffic movement on Washington Street, a Major Arterial. The modification of the landscaped median is consistent with General Plan Circulation Element Goal 3-2 which requires roadway design standards to accurately reflect projected traffic volumes based upon development densities. 2. The design of the subdivision and proposed turn pocket improvements are not likely to cause environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish, or wildlife. 3. The design of the proposed off -site subdivision improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems due to imposed conditions as outlined in the project's traffic report by Endo Engineering. The design of the turn lane on A:\ResoPCtr242305panos.wpd -46 Greg/Page 1 )_J 107 Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 2 Washington Street maintains street capacity in compliance with General Plan Circulation Policy 3-3.1.3. 4. The design of the left-hand turn pocket will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large based on written responses received for this case. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tract Amendment, the Planning Commission has considered, the effect of the contemplated action on housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. The existing Lake La Quinta development has complied with the mitigation measures imposed under Environmental Assessments 89-1 10 and an Addendum is recommended for this Amendment; and 3. That it does recommend approval of Tract 24230 (Amendment #1) to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27' day of February, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California A:AReso PCtr24230Spanos.wpd -46 Greg/Page 2 e .J 1 U i1 Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 3 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\ResoPCtr24230Spanos.wpd -46 Greg/Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TRACT 24230, AMENDMENT #1 (LAKE LA QUINTA) THE SPANOS COMPANIES FEBRUARY 27, 2001 CONDITIONS.: GENERAL 1 . Tract 24230 (Amendment #1) shall comply with the requirements and standards of § § 66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Title 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2. This Map Amendment shall expire within two years, unless extended pursuant to Section 13.1 2.1 50 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 3. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 4. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering a Citywide Landscape and Lighting District and, by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in the District and to offer for dedication such easements as may be required for the maintenance and operation of related facilities. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis, as required by law. 5. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering an Underground Utilities District along Washington Street, 48`h Avenue, and Adams Street, and by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in the District. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis, as required by law. 6. The Developer of this subdivision of land shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of recording of the final map without the approval of the City Engineer. cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 1 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 2 7. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering an Assessment District to finance Washington Street improvements, which will be made by the City in the near future, and by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in this District. Assessments will be levied on a benefit basis, as required by law. D RA I N AG-E_AND—aRADI NG 8. The Applicant shall submit a grading plan that is prepared by a registered civil engineer who will be required to supervise the grading and drainage improvement construction and to certify that the constructed conditions at the rough grade stage are as per the approved plans and grading permit. This is required prior to final map approval. Certification at the final grade stage and verification of pad elevations is also required prior to final approval of grading construction. 9. The Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to Coachella Valley Water District for review and comment with respect to CVWD's water management program. These plans shall include the landscape and irrigation plans for all perimeter street setback areas, common areas and retention area. 10. A thorough preliminary engineering geological and soils engineering investigation shall be done and the report submitted for review along with the grading plan. The report's recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 1 1. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire tract, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a. The use of irrigation during any construction activities; b. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing and/or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and Community Development Department. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. cond Tr 24230 Spnos - 46 Greg T.; Page 2 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 3 12. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils and take necessary precautions to limit and clean any track -out onto existing paved surfaces pursuant to Chapter 6.16 (Fugitive Dust Control) of the LQMC. STREET ANDSRAFFI�CIRC_ULATlON 13. The Applicant shall construct or bond for half street improvements, to the requirements of the City Engineer and the La Quinta Municipal Code, as follows: a. Washington Street shall be constructed to City standards for a 120-foot right-of- way width (Major Arterial), with a curb -to -curb width of 96 feet, six-foot sidewalk, and two -percent cross slope to centerline, including median, plus one land, plus joins. Construct roadway improvements to Sunline Transit standards for bus shelter and turnout area along Washington Street, north of 48`h Avenue. b. 48`h Avenue and Adams Street shall be constructed to City standards for a 1 10- foot right-of-way width (Primary Arterial), with an 18-foot raised median island, six-foot sidewalk, and two -percent cross slope to centerline, plus joins. C. 47`h Avenue shall be constructed to City standards for a 72-foot right -of -way width (Collector), with five-foot sidewalk and two -percent cross slope to centerline, plus joins (Applicant/Developer may be responsible for construction of this roadway in its entirety). d. The interior public/private street system shall be designed pursuant to the approved Tentative Tract Map Exhibits, and the requirements of the City Engineer. Any required or requested variations to the approved street system design sections shall be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department. Final roadway designs shall be coordinated with other developments adjacent to this project (see Condition No. 14.d.). The applicant shall submit street improvement plans that are prepared by a registered civil engineer pursuant to the design recommendations of Endo Engineering in their report on file with the City of La Quinta, for the following improvement: cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 3 112 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 4 Washington Street (Major Arterial) at Lake La Quinta Drive - Construct modification to the raised median to provide a left turn pocket for dedicated left turn from southbound Washington Street onto Lake La Quinta Drive. The cost of median modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact Fee fund in an amount not to exceed the budgeted amount. 14. Applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the Public Works Department: a. The Applicant shall dedicate all necessary public street and utility easements as required, including all corner cutbacks. All necessary rights -of -way for Washington Street, 48`h Avenue, 47th Avenue, and Adams Street shall be dedicated to the City within 60 days of the tentative map approval date by the City Council for Tentative Tract 24230; or, if A. G. Spanos has not completed acquisition of the subject land area, said dedications shall be executed no later than 20 days after final acquisition of the site. Means of dedication shall be determined by the City Engineer. No land disturbance or other permits shall be issued until these dedications have been appropriately executed. 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. b. The Applicant shall submit street improvement plans that are prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements, including traffic signs and markings and raise median islands (if required by the City General Plan) shall conform to City standards as determined by the City Engineer and adopted by the La Quinta Municipal Code (three-inch AC over four -inch Class 2 Base minimum for residential streets only). Street improvement plans shall be prepared in accordance with Condition No. 13. C. Street name signs shall be furnished and installed by the Developer in accordance with City standards. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, and sidewalks. cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 4 a.�" IA Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 5 d. The Applicant understands that, due to uncertainties such as timing of required improvements relative to this and adjacent projects, there is a need to provide guarantees for reimbursement of costs between these projects. By gaining approval of this map, Applicant agrees to participate in the preparation of reciprocal reimbursements for the adequate completion of these improvements, if necessary. The form of the agreement (s) shall consider items to include, but not to be limited to, median improvement reimbursements, landscaping instaNlation and maintenance, half street joins, intersection improvements/signals, etc. Determination as to the extent of specificity to be contained in the agreement (s) shall be at the discretion of the Public Works Director. Reimbursement for improvements to 471h and 48rh Avenues, and construction of Adams Street along APN 617-070-014 (CVWD facility), shall be subject to provisions of this section, and coordinated by the City Engineer. e. The Applicant shall provide surety, subject to the City Engineer's requirements, in an amount equal to one-third of the cost for traffic signalization at Washington Street and 481h Avenue. 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): Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" 15. Drainage disposal facilities shall be provided as required by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of the City Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of any drainage fees required therewith. The project shall retain 100-year storm drainage on -site and/or construct piped drainage system to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, including street drainage flow from the adjacent one-half width street sections (Washington Street, Adams Street, 471h and 481h Avenues), which the applicant is responsible for construction of, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. All drywell/sedimentation basins shall be accessible at street locations. Nuisance water shall be retained within the median. 16. Prior to transmittal of the final map to the City Council by the City Engineering Department, any existing structures which are to be removed from the property shall have been removed or there shall be an agreement for the removal which shall be secured by a faithful performance bond in a form satisfactory to the City and granting the City the right to cause any such structures to be removed. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted standards, cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 5 Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 6 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. 17. A common area lot shall be established for that area between the tract perimeter wall and street right-of-way for 471h Avenue, Washington Street, 48`h Avenue, and Adams Street. Landscape maintenance responsibility of common lots and street landscape parkway areas shall be the responsibility of the Lake La Quinta development. 18. Development of the lake area shall occur as outlined in the Lake Design and Development Report, prepared by J. Harlan Glenn & Associates, dated May 11, 1989, as incorporated by reference thereto and made part of these conditions. A detailed ecosystem and lake management, maintenance, and operation plan for the lake shall be submitted for review/approval by the City Engineer, to include water quality parameter monitoring, reporting schedules, and procedure to be utilized with responsible agencies (City of La Quinta, CVWD, Mosquito Abatement District, Water Quality Control Board), concise statements as to the actual use of the lake waters for recreational purposes, if any, inventory of species, if any, to be stocked and maintained in the lake and how the ecosystem would operate, etc. This plan shall also include a general analysis of the feasibility for the use of canal water as a lakefill/maintenance/irrigation source, as suggested by CVWD. This requirement shall not preclude the Applicant from utilizing well sources, if use of the canal source is infeasible. The required management and operations plan shall be made part of a management and maintenance agreement for purposes of assuring continuous implementation of the lake management plan, with the right to lien property owners for the costs involved with the lake maintenance and operation in accordance with the approved plan. This agreement shall be included in the CC&R's submitted for final review and approval by the City (refer to Conditions 26 and 29). 19. An encroachment permit for work in the City of La Quinta shall be secured prior to construction or joining improvements. 20. Applicant shall dedicate, with recordation of the tract map, access rights to 47`h Avenue, 48m Avenue, Washington Street, and Adams Street for all individual parcels which front or back up to those rights -of -way. 21. Tract phasing plans, including phasing of public and off -site improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department and the Planning and Development Department prior to final map approval. cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 6 1-iL' 115 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 7 22. Access to the tract shall be permitted as follows: a. Washington Street access shall be limited to right turns in/out and left turn in only; b. Adams Street may be permitted a full median break; and C. 48`h Avenue may be permitted a full median break. TRACT DESIGN 23. A minimum 20-foot landscaped setback shall be required along Washington Street, Adams Street, and 48`h Avenue. A minimum 10-foot landscaped setback shall be provided along 47`h Avenue. Design of the setbacks shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way lines. a. The minimum setbacks may be modified to an "average" if a meandering or curvilinear wall design is used. b. Setback areas shall be established as a separate common lot and be maintained as set forth in Condition No. 29, unless an alternate method is approved by the Community Development Department. 24. Seventy-five percent of any dwelling units within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of Adams Street shall be limited to one story, not to exceed 20 feet in height. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department for approval a siting plan showing the location of any units higher than one story located along those frontages. No dwelling units within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of 48`h Avenue shall be higher than one story, not to exceed 20 feet in height. 25. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the appropriate Community Development Department approval shall be secured prior to establishing any of the following uses: a. Temporary construction facilities. b. Sales facilities and/or model homes, including their appurtenant slgnage. cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 7 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 8 C. Access gates and/or guardhouses. d. On -site advertising/construction signs. 26. If a specific dwelling product is envisioned or if groups of lots are sold to builders prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant/Builder shall submit complete detail architectural elevations for all units. The Planning Commission will review and approve these as a Business Item. The basic architectural standards shall be included as part of the CC&R's. This item is required prior to any issuance of building permits. 27. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into tract design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques so as to avoid the isolated appearance given by walled developments. 28. Prior to approval of any grading or other site disturbance activities or permits, the applicant shall submit an archaeological mitigation plan to indicate the status of any existing archaeological/cultural resources of any potential significance. Said plan shall identify any existing reports done by the University of California, Riverside, Archaeological Research Unit, and shall include methods by which any significant or potentially significant sites (specifically CA RIV-1729) will be inventoried and/or excavated. A mitigation and monitoring program shall be required to be submitted, specifying a qualified archaeological monitor including any assistant and other representatives. The statement shall provide the current address and phone number for each monitor. The designated monitors may be changed from time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail on the Community Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 8 Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Tract 24230, Amendment k1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 9 29. The subdivder shall make provisions for maintenance of all landscape buffer, storm water retention and lake areas via one of the following methods prior to final map approval: a. Subdivider shall consent to the formation of a maintenance district under Chapter 26 of the Improvement Act of 1911 (Streets and Highways Code, Section 5820 et seq.) or the Lighting and Landscaping Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22600 et seq.) to implement maintenance of all improved landscape buffer and storm water retention areas, not to include any retention capacity which is provided within the lake, or the lake itself. It is understood and agreed that the Developer/Applicant shall pay all costs of maintenance for said improved areas until such time as tax revenues are received from assessment of the real property. b. The Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department a Management and Maintenance Agreement, to be entered into with the lot owners of this land division, in order to insure common areas and facilities will be maintained. The Association shall have an unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs. The Association shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. The common facilities to be maintained are as follows: (1) Storm water retention system/24-acre lake. (2) Twenty -foot perimeter parkway lots along Adams Street, Washington Street, and 481h Avenue. (3) Ten -foot perimeter parkway lot along 47" Avenue 30. Prior to the recordation of the final map, Applicant/Developer shall furnish water system plans to the Fire Department for approval. Plans shall conform to the hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. The Applicant shall comply with all other requirements of the City Fire Marshal at the time of development of any parcel. 31. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District. Any parcels necessary for District facility expansion shall be shown on the final map cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 9 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 10 and conveyed to the Coachella Valley Water District, in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. 32. All utilities will be installed and trenched compacted to City standards prior to construction of any streets. The soils engineer shall provide the necessary compaction and soils test reports for review by the City Engineer, as may be required. LANDSCAPING/ -WALLS 33. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department for review and approval a plan (or plans) showing the following: a. Landscaping, including plant types, sizes, spacing locations, and irrigation system for all perimeter and common landscape buffer areas. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planting materials shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. b. Location and design detail of any proposed and/or required walls. C. Exterior lighting plan, emphasizing minimization of light and glare impacts to surrounding properties. 34. Prior to issuance of building permits, the subdivider shall submit criteria to be used for landscaping of all individual lot front yards. At a minimum, the criteria shall provide for two 2.4-gallon trees, complete ground cover, and an irrigation system. Existing landscaping in the Washington Street median, subject to removal by the new improvements, shall be replanted to other areas in the median if deemed necessary by the City Engineer. MISCELLANEOUS 35. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the Applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances for the following public agencies: o City Fire Marshal o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o Planning and Development Department, Planning Division cond Tr 24230 Sparros - 46 Greg T.; Page 10 ' , 119 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 11 o Coachella Valley Water District o Imperial Irrigation District Evidence of said permits or clearances for the above -mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building & Safety Department at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 36. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Development Impact Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. (To be moved to the Fee and Deposit Section) 37. Prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 38. The Applicant shall coordinate with Sunline Transit and the City to provide a bus shelter at the bus turnout location on Washington Street north of 48rh Avenue. The bus turnout and shelter shall be provided in the approved street improvement plans, and shall be constructed with those improvements. 39. Prior to the issuance of any grading, building, or other development permit or final inspection, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of TT 24230 and EA 89-1 10, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of any permits/final inspections. The Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. Said inspection or monitoring may be accomplished by consultant (s) at the discretion of the Director, and all costs associated shall be borne by the Applicant/Developer. Compliance with the provisions of EA 89-110 (Addendum) shall be satisfied before a grading permit is issue to install the southbound left -turn pocket on Washington Street. 40. Prior to approval by the City Council of the final map, CZ 89-037 shall be in effect. 41. The multi -family parcel at the southwest corner of Avenue 47 and Adams Street shall be limited to a maximum density of 16 units/acre. Development proposals for this parcel shall be reviewed through the Site Development Permit process. A minimum of five percent of the total units proposed on this site shall be reserved for low and moderate income housing. (Owned by the Redevelopment Agency) cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 11 -:J j i 1-1 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment k1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 12 42. Commercial development (s) proposed on Lots "U", "W", "V, and "Y" applications shall be subject to review through the Conditional Use Permit process. Development of Lot "V" (recreation area lot) shall be subject to review through the commercial plot plan process. 43. The Applicant/Developer shall pay fees, in lieu of parkland dedication, based upon 2.46 acres of parkland required to be dedication pursuant to Chapter 13.48 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. This payment shall be made prior to scheduling the final map, or any portion thereof, for City Council approval. Parcel 'I" (multi -family parcel) shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 13.48 of the LQMC at the time of submittal/approval of development plans. 44. Upon their approval by the City Council a memorandum noting that City Conditions of Approval for this application exist and are available for review at City Hall shall be recorded against the property with Riverside County. 45. Tentative Tract Map 24230 shall be developed in accordance with applicable provision of the Washington Street Specific Plan, as adopted by City Council Resolution No. 86- 14 on March 4, 1986, and subject to subsequent amendments as previously approved by the City Council, except where these conditions shall take precedence in the event of identified conflicts. FEES _AND DEPOSITS 46. 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. QUALLLY—AS$URANDE 47. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 48. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 12 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ Tract 24230, Amendment #1 - The Spanos Companies February 27, 2001 Page 13 SPECIAL 49. Tract conditions that have been previously completed by the developer and accepted by the City of La Quinta are herein referenced for this Amendment, but require no formal action by the developer in order to install the Washington Street left-hand turn lane. cond Tr 24230 Spanos - 46 Greg T.; Page 13 ATTACHMENTS _ _ F'F M ieFe } _ !;isilf i N CY N �z . Ir YW I' zg W F— NO F F133.17S uoa$uiuseM I i NI,�! —IIIFi P. is Attachment 1 III ' 13311S swvpv IueZ)en . 12k Attachment 2 n Figure 1 Attachment 4 Study Area Signalized Intersection Avenue 47 Four Vacant Commercial Area C Parcels Undeveloped land for up to Existing 40 Single Family Units Raised Median Area A Along Washington Street Lake La Proposed Quints Dr. - Median �pe�ed Break Bed & Breakfast For Southbound Left -Turns Three Vacant Commercial Three Parcels Vacant rn Commercial Via Florence Parcels 0 rn c iE Area B IN 3 Future m Medical 0 Offices m Signalized Intersection Avenue 48 IRVE Scale: 1" = 400' ndo Engineering cmv • 616 10 Attachment 3 tar 9 hlE to J M d J& W MN rb I M J t� Q W V) U O ry ' W W NO `2 p L1 L ' a.O U Attachment 5 t4 w --JA1 Q Q —_ VINIAb e7 9XV7 W 0 0 IL 0 0 W 0) 0 IL 0 123 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2001 CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-692 APPLICANT: CLIFF HOUSE DEVELOPMENT, LLC LOCATION: 78-250 HIGHWAY 111 REQUEST: ADDITION OF 32 TANDEM PARKING SPACES TO THE EXISTING PARKING LOT FOR THE CLIFF HOUSE RESTAURANT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED BY THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER SECTION 15311, CLASS 11 . THEREFORE NO FURTHER ASSESSMENT IS DEEMED NECESSARY. ZONING: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES: NORTH: VACANT - WHITE WATER CHANNEL SOUTH: PLAZA LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER WITH COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION EAST: POINT HAPPY ROCK AND DEVELOPMENT WITH COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION WEST: VACANT, WITHIN THE CITY OF INDIAN WELLS, BEING DEVELOPED AS AN AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT P:UERRY\PCRPT-SDP-02-692.wpd BACKGROUND: The City Council on May 15, 1990, accepted the Planning Commission's approval of an amendment to the original Plot Plan (89- 417 approved by the City Council on September 6, 1989). The amendment was to change the architectural style from southwestern to an early California hacienda style. Project Request Proposed is a request to modify the parking lot along the west property line by adding 32 tandem parking spaces to the existing parking spaces. The landscape area to the west of the proposed parking spaces will be modified by relocating seven existing trees, and two existing light poles. Lantana, bougainvillea, Texas ranger plants and mounding, will be added in front of the new parking areas. Two existing light poles remain and will be protected with curbing. The Cliff House restaurant was permitted to have valet parking under the original permit. The Zoning Code (Section 9.150.080) permits tandem parking where valet parking is provided. Self parking ,however, must be provide at a rate of 25% of the parking area (Section 9.150.080 G (2)). In addition, no parking lot shall be located within three feet of any property line. The parking lot expansion will be constructed on property owned by CVWD, who has approved the parking lot revisions. This intrusion, plus the installation of new and relocation of existing landscaping, will provide the necessary buffering. Additional land does exist between the proposed parking spaces and the concrete wall of the Whitewater Channel to accommodate the future bike way and buffer landscaping. The proposed modifications to the parking lot and the landscaping plans, as conditioned, comply with the parking lot design standards of the Zoning Code. Public Notice: This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on February 17, 2001, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet around the project boundaries. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to recommend approval of Site Development Permit per Zoning Code Section 9.210.010.F., can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. P:UERRY\PCRPT-SDP-02-692.wpd 4• J .130 RECOMMENUATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, approving Site Development Permit 2001-692, subject to conditions. Attachments: 1. Parking plan 2. Landscape plan 3. Large maps (Planning Commission only) Prepared and Submitted by, 4r1e'yIer anmu ty Development Director ...v. 1_31 P:\JERRY\PCRPT-SDP-02-692.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE REVISED PARKING LOT AND, LANDSCAPING, FOR THE CLIFFHOUSE RESTAURANT CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-692 APPLICANT: CLIFFHOUSE DEVELOPMENT, LLC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 2,FT" day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Cliffhouse Development, LLC to approve the revised parking lot and, landscaping plans for the Cliffhouse Restaurant in the CC Zoning District, located at 78-250 Highway 1 1 1, more particularly described as: PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP 22596 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the Community Development Director has determined this request is categorically exempted by the guidelines for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per section 15311, class 11 . Therefore, no further assessment is deemed necessary. 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 find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Site Development Permit: 1. Consistency with General Plan. The proposed revision to the existing parking lot and landscaping is located in the Community Commercial designation (CC), and is consistent with the general development characteristics in Table LU-4 of the C:ity's General Plan in that the CC designation allows for parking lots in conjunction with businesses offering uses serving the needs of multiple neighborhood areas. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The proposed revision to the existing parking lot and landscaping is consistent with the development standards of the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District, and has been designed to comply with the development standards of Chapter 9.150 of the La Quinta Municipal Code: with regard to landscaping and parking requirements. 3. Architectural Design. The proposed revision to the existing parking lot and landscaping does not change the approved architectural design of the Cliffhouse Restaurant. P:\JERRY\PCRESOSDP-01-692.wpd a•J `j 132 Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Site Development Permit 2001-692 Cliff house Restaurant February 27, 2001 4. Site Design. As conditioned, the revision to the existing parking lot and landscaping plans are consistent with the Cliffhouse Restaurant. 5. Landscape Design. As conditioned, the proposed landscaping plan is consistent with the landscape development standards of Chapter 9.150 of the La Quinta Municipal code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2001-692 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions of Approval and as depicted on Exhibits "A" and "B", attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 27`h day of February, 2001, 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 _.; .133 PAJ ERRY\PCRESOS DP-01-692.wpd aa5 5aa5 fi i"?a � 9W 'S �A'aa99� • M ♦ al � n Y .� " /(j BBB888HEa YE„E H III m _ i C I zf :i a r �®- d . Izb �►I z �a� o a � � Q. W � Z J N � 9 J 3 O F+` M e t o` a �Q �, a7 � z i �G - .x F - � � �� .�G ; .. .q ` ' . � � Y a , '� N ,�, .`�,( J � d n y W 7 � c W W Q � s @I N � ' W d m Y S �� 'Y y�. _ Y u � ♦ o � _�' - 4 f: � � - ' w • _ �'.� �` �'�1111I- .�, R �. � � - y' a 7� 2 ul.< 115. - Hd A .. �6 N a'(pt �' x - .L , C PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-692 CLIFFHOUSE RESTAURANT FEBRUARY 27, 2001 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this permit. The City shell have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. The applicant shall develop the revised parking lot and landscaping as illustrated on the plans labeled Exhibits "A" and "B", contained in the file for this application. PROPERTY RIGHTS 3. 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. GRADING 4. Prior to any work in the Right of Way, applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from all appropriate agencies. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. 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. P-AJERRYVPCCOA.-SDP-01-692 wpd Printed February 22, 2001 Page 1 of 3 0.0 J 3 S PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-692 CLIFFHOUSE RESTAURANT FEBRUARY 27, 2001 DRAINAGE 8. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in an approved manner. 9. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 10. The applicant shall participate in the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. Public improvements shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction. A. Bike Path - applicant shall pay pro-rata share of Bike Path adjacent to the project site, along the side of the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel. Pro-rata share shall not exceed $30 per lineal foot of 8-foot wide PCC Bike Path. B. Highway 111 (Major Arterial) - applicant shall enter an improvement agreement and bond for 50% of the cost of a sidewalk, curb and gutter between the Point Happy development and the Cliffhouse entry drive. Applicant shall be responsible for paying 50% of the cost of the sidewalk. 1 1 . Parking lot 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. 12. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b. '_ 1.37 P.A.IER1ZYVPCCOA-SDP-01-692.wpd Printed FebRiary 22, 2001 Page 2 ot3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-692 CLIFFHOUSE RESTAURANT FEBRUARY 27, 2001 LANDSCAPIPJG 13. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 14. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. 15. Final landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of any permit for this project. The plans shall comply with the plan approved by the planning commission. QUALITY Af;SURANCE 16. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. MAINTENANCE 17. 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 18. 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. MISCELLANEOUS 19. The proposed parking lot expansion will impact the CV Water District's right-of- way along the Deep Canyon Stormwater Channel. The District will require the developer to obtain an encroachment permit from the district prior to construction. 20. A minimum 25% of the parking spaces, provided for the restaurant, shall be made available for self -parking during valet hours. 21. All applicable conditions contained in Plot Plan 89-417, including any amendments, shall still apply unless amended by these conditions. $, i 1-33 P:AJBRRYVPCCOA-SDP-01-G92.wpd Printed February 22.2001 Page 3 of PH #E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2001 CASE NO.: SIGN APPROVAL 2001-536 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: M&H REALTY PARTNERS REQUEST: AMENDMENT TO SIGN PROGRAM FOR COMMERCIAL PAD BUILDINGS LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND HIGHWAY 111, WITHIN PLAZA LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: CC (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL WITH A NOW RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY) ZONING: CC (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL WITH A NOW RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY) SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES: NORTH: CC / SHOPPING CENTER UNDER CONSTRUCTION SOUTH: CC / PART OF PLAZA LA QUINTA EAST: CC / PART OF PLAZA LA QUINTA WEST: CC / PART OF PLAZA LA QUINTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THIS APPLICATION IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15311, CLASS 11, OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT IN THAT IT IS FOR NEW SIGNS. THEREFORE, NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION IS NECESSARY. BACKGROUND: The property involved is Plaza La Quinta, a 137,700 square foot commercial shopping center originally developed in the early 1980's (Attachment 1). Major tenants in the pAstan\sa 2001-536 pc rpt.wpd center include Von's Supermarket, The Beerhunter, Lumpy's and Downey Savings. The center is primarily designed in an early California architectural style utilizing beige plaster walls, decorative tile accents and paving, wood framed multi -pane windows and doors, and mudded red clay tile roofs. On June 6, 2001, the City Council approved a 6,600 square foot multi -tenant pad building immediately east of Downey Savings and Loan. The building is currently under construction. The building was approved with the original sign program which permits externally illuminated wood sandblasted wall signs or wood framed tile face hanging wood signs. REQUEST: The applicant has submitted an amended sign program for "single or multi -tenant occupancy pad building" uses (Attachment 2). The proposal is to add a new Type "D" sign, consisting of internally illuminated cannister (cabinet) or individual internally illuminated channel letter signs, mounted on or parallel to the building elevation. The elevation exhibit show the inclusion of integrated logos in the signs. Under the proposal, the size must comply with the Zoning Code requirements (one square foot of sign per lineal foot of lease space frontage up to a maximum of 50 square feet)• The submitted sign exhibit shows Type "D" wall mounted signs on the south elevation facing the center, facing Highway 1 1 1, and facing the east and west elevations for the end tenants. No color or material criteria is proposed for the new signs. Generally, these types of signs consist of plexiglas faces and metal retainers and returns. This amendment would also apply to tenants in the pad or freestanding locations of the center (Downey Savings, Lumpy's, and The Beerhunter). FINDINGS: The findings_; as required by Section 9.160.090 (Sign Permit Review) of the Zoning Code can be: made as noted below, with the revisions recommended: 1 . The amended Sign Program is consistent with the purpose and intent of the sign requirements provided the changes recommended below are implemented. 2. The amended Sign Program is in harmony with and visually related to all other signs within the center, the buildings they identify, and surrounding development provided the Type "D" sign requirements include the following revisions as noted in Conditions #2 through 5: A. Cabinet box signs shall only be allowed if it is a part of a formally registered trademark of the business which is used for business sign identification. B. Individual internally illuminated letter signs shall not exceed 24" in height with logos not exceeding 30" in height. pAstan\sa 2001-536 pc rpt.wpd C. Individual internally illuminated letter sign returns and trim caps shall be limited to two colors (trim and returns to be one color). The colors shall be approved by the Community Development Department. D. No "halo" lit signs shall be allowed. In conclusion, the findings needed to approve this request can be made provided the recommended conditions of approval as noted above, are imposed. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2001- , approving the amended sign program for Plaza La Quinta, subject to the above findings and the attached conditions. Attachments: 1 . Location map 2. Amended sign program exhibits Prepared by:: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner Submitted by: flu a Christine di lorio, Planni Manager p:\stan\sa 2001-536 pc rpt.wpd D^J�. 1"1 Minute Motion 2001- Sign Application 2001-536 M&H Realty Partners Conditions of Approval - Recommended February 27, 2001 1. Prior to issuance of the first "Type D" sign permit as allowed by this approval, the sign program document shall be revised to include the following conditions of approval. 2. Cabinet box signs shall only be allowed if it is a part of a formally registered trademark of the business which is used for business sign identification. 3. Individual internally illuminated letter signs shall not exceed 24" in height with logos not exceeding 30" in height. 4. Individual internally illuminated letter sign returns and trim caps shall be limited to two colors (trim and returns to be one color). The colors shall be approved by the Community Development Department. 5. No "halo" lit signs shall be allowed. 6. Type "D" signs shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Approval of the sign may be referred to the Planning Commission if it is deemed that the design of the sign warrants such review. 7. Under "Note" for Type "D" signs, reference to "Type B" signs shall be changed to "Type C" signs. p:\stan\sa 2001-536 coampd a J 1. y T4tvl 4 lwQ9.1Krw MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2001 SUBJECT: JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The City Council has set aside April 4, 2001, for a joint meeting to review the General Plan. The meeting will start at 6:00 p.m. with a presentation by CVWD on their Master Plan and then roughly at 7:00 p.m. we will commence discussions regarding the General (Plan. A"),. 143 ID=858 259 OeeG PAGE 7!1 FEB-27-01 13=54 FROM:M&H PROPERTY MGMT. ; M� PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC. VIA FAX TRANSMITTAL To: City of La Quinta Stan Sawa, Principle Planner 7f"95 Call& Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 (760) 777-1233 From: Glenn Goodman Construction Manager Date: February 27, 2001 Subject: Plaza La Quinta 27, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting February Sign Program Approval 2001-536 12555 High Bluff Drive Suite 385 San Diego, California 92130 Ph: 858:350.197/7 Fax: 858259.8686 FEB 2 7 2001 Due to our late notification of tonight's Planning Con-amssion Meeting, M&H is requesting that Item E or, tonight's agenda be continued to the March 13, 2001 Planning Comlrussion arch 13, meeting. we would also like to request being nsrslease eel on fliee oegrveamcha ea l Thank 2001 meeting if possible. If you have any q P vou. CC: David Geiser, M&H a.J 02-27-01 1,1-:48 RECEIVED FROM:8582598886 L A, P.01 1 G-L 7�� 7�7 i t /fr7tz7/5353 -MIL L-Crime CrIeP ft-PPz lcl+-1 f6yo Foe ,r I ,� PX� J4) n� 6 TO wJ S-T?2 5 " Tog r4 AJ rv�cnss/t✓z'/, T 8C-L,G/6 �cc �ii� r v/ jfB /h�4Jole 7-1 6� z_f� er GH t� t5rD6n1 T5 WIZ=i�� "Tthis C (t(E 4 °'9rL� February 26, 2001 Fred Baker, AICP Principal Planner City of La Quinta Planning Commission 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mr. Baker, Please accept this letter as our request to continue our participation on the calendar at the public hearing scheduled for tomorrow night, Feb. 27, 2001, regarding the final approval of Tentative Tract Map 30056 in Tradition Golf Club. We are requesting the continuance to give us more time to present our plans to the current members of our club. We woul li ;e the above referenced map to be added to the calendar for the last meeting in March 2 , 001. Thank o� for your )aeration. / / 7 V t rly yos / David Chapman President Tradition Club Associates i_: Sr+f,r ,. MA I, t. m. F0�5f9-i 061 li rci1564-„55 "r,JiS 4,SStJi F ��i564 �305 c�/5o r, i:-L,�TLi 1 I. M STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: FEBRUARY 27, 2001 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-075, CHANGE OF ZONE 2001-067, SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051, VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007 AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30043 REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; TO CHANGE LANDS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED AS MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL, REVIEW DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A COMMERCIAL/OFFICE, DISTRIBUTION CENTER AND 227 WHOLE OWNERSHIP SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS WITH THE LEASING POTENTIAL OF 365 GUEST ROOMS; REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE BUILDINGS; AND THE SUBDIVISION OF 33 ACRES INTO 15 NUMBERED AND 17 LETTERED LOTS. LOCATION: THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND CALLE TAMPICO. APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411 WAS PREPARED FOR THE PROPOSED APPLICATIONS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS RECOMMENDED THAT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE CERTIFIED. GENERAL PLAN/ CURRENT: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL AND MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY ZONING/ RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATIONS: PROPOSED: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL G:\WPDOCS\VINPCStfRpt.WPD �•�� -`: BACKGROU�ID: Site Background The project site is currently vacant land which was previously in date palm and citrus cultivation. The site is bounded on three sides by roadways: Calle Tampico on the south, Eisenhower Drive on the west, and Avenida Bermudas on the east. The La Quinta Evacuation Channel occurs along the northern boundary of the site. The northern one third of the site is currently designated for Medium High Density Residential, while the balance is Village Commercial. The entire parcel is within the boundary of the Village Design Guidelines (Attachment 1). Project Request In addition to the Environmental Assessment, the following applications have been filed: 1 . A General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone to eliminate the Medium High Density Residential designation on the northerly one third of the property, and change it to Village Commercial. 2. A Specific Plan to establish development standards and design guidelines for 227 whole ownership single family dwellings with the leasing potential of 365 guest rooms, retail commercial space up to 20,000 s.f., office commercial space up to 20,600 s.f., a 40,000 s.f. distribution center for the La Quinta Hotel, and employee parking for 630 cars. 3. A Village Use Permit for the architectural design of the office and residential/ guest room building plans, as well as the construction of perimeter improvements for the site. 4. A vesting tentative tract map which divides the proposed 33 acre project site into 16 numbered lots and 17 lettered lots. The Specific: Plan provides the design guidelines and development standards which will guide the future development of the site. Village Use Permits (VUP) will need to be secured in the future for the construction of the retail commercial and distribution center/employee parking lot on the site. The Specific Plan further details the potential architectural style of the buildings, and the types of materials which will be utilized. These are also itemized in the Village Use Permit materials. The architectural design and site plan of the residential/guest room and office component are the only immediate projects being considered at this time. The variations to the City's zoning standards are discussed individually below, under Design Issues. G\WPDOCS\VMPCStfFpt.WPD The project will be accessed from all three streets. The primary access points will be located on Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico. Secondary access to the retail commercial component (right -in, right -out only) is proposed on Calle Tampico. Access on Avenida Bermudas is also proposed for the office and distribution center/employee parking lot. Avenida Bermudas is proposed for vacation, from the mid -point of the property northerly. The General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone apply to the northerly one third of the 33 acres. The land is currently designated Medium High Density Residential and is proposed for Village Commercial. The change represents a logical extension of the Village Commercial land uses, and encourages the construction of mixed land uses, which will enhance the resort residential and commercial opportunities within this area of the City. The Architectural and Landscaping Committee at its February 7, 2001, meeting, reviewed the: building elevations for the office and residential/guest room buildings. (Attachment 2). Public Notice This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on February 17, 2001. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the Zoning Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal Code. To date, no comments have been received. Public Agency Review All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the Conditions of Approval for this case. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: The findings necessary to recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, Specific Plan, Village Use Permit and Tentative Tract Map can be made, as noted in the attached resolutions with the exception of the property suitability finding for the Specific Plan, which is described below: Finding #4 - Property Suitability Issues associated with the design of the project are discussed below. Conditions of approval have been included to address these issues, and are discussed individually. Retail Commercial The Retail Commercial component of the plan includes the possibility for restaurant use. Parking allocation in this area has been calculated at 250 s.f. per parking space, however, which is the general commercial calculation. The standard for restaurant useF 49 G:\WPDoCS\VMPCStfR0t.WPD m�mnnmimnnmmmn is much more stringent, since restaurants are much more parking intensive. In order to control this potential problem, it is recommended that the maximum square footage which could be developed as restaurant space in this area be 5,000 s.f., which would require 67 parking spaces. Based on the assumption that a restaurant use would have its peak hours after retail commercial uses were closed, this allows for shared parking within this component of the plan. A condition of approval has been added to require this addition (#12). Trash Enclosures Neither the Specific Plan nor the Village Use Permit include trash enclosure locations. A condition of approval has been added which requires Community Development Department review and approval of such locations prior to issuance of grading permits (#13). Sian Program The signs proposed in the Specific Plan do not provide sufficient detail, including size and location, to make a determination as to its adequacy. A condition of approval has been added (Condition #14) which requires that signs for the project be processed through a Village Use Permit, and that all signs shall conform to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Development Standards The development standards in the Specific Plan (pages 2.18 through 2.31) include the statement "Whenever possible" for each standard listed. As such, the standards are meaningless. It is recommended that the words "whenever possible" or "wherever possible" be eliminated from this section. A condition of approval has been added to this effect (#15). Zoning Reaulations The Specific Plan uses the term "limited" for conference space as a permitted use (page 3.3, item B.2.; page 3.9, item B.6.) without quantifying the term. It is recommended that the Plan be amended to include a limitation of 10% of the maximum square footage for these uses, so as to ensure that they do not become principal permitted uses, with inadequate consideration of parking needs. A condition of approval has been added (#19). On page 3.3 of the Plan, second sentence under item B.2. was requested to be changed by staff to ancillary uses only. A condition of approval has been added to correct this sentence (#20). The residential/guest room component of the plan proposes buildings of 37 feet in height (page 3.5, Table). The height limit within the Village Commercial design guidelines is 35 feet. There is a further restriction imposed regarding building height in image corridors (22 feet), which the project meets. The architecture of the buildings, J G:\ W PDOCS\V MPCStfRot. W PD i nn�rtrm�n � mnwnnnnnl is varied considerably, and not all roof peaks will occur at this height. A condition of approval has been added which reduces the building height in the residential/guest room component to 35 feet (#21). Landscaping The landscaping plan has not been detailed in the materials submitted. The plant palette is acceptable, but the size, distribution, location of plantings, location of walls and berming have not been provided. Finally, the submittal does not demonstrate that perimeter landscaping will be completed for the entire site at the initiation of the project. It is therefore recommended that the applicant be required to submit landscaping plans for ALRC approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. Such conditions have been added (#16 & 17). Parkin No provision is made in the Plan for covered parking, which would be required for residential land uses otherwise locating in the City. It is recommended that 50% of the parking be covered for the residential component. Further, commercial land uses are required to provide 30% covered parking, which is not included in this proposal. This standard should also be maintained, and such a condition has been added (#26). The Zoning standards for the residential component call for 1.5 parking units per residential units. The parking standard at 1.5 spaces per unit would result in a total of 341 parking spaces being required. The project, however, could generate a total of 365 bedrooms, if all units are locked off. This would result in insufficient parking for all guests. A condition of approval has been added requiring that the Specific Plan be amended to reflect a minimum standard of 1 space per bedroom (page 3.5, Table). CONCLUSION: The General Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, Specific Plan, Village Use Permit and Tentative Tract Map represent an appropriate use of the parcel on which they are proposed. The Specific Plan and Village Use Permit, as conditioned, are compatible with surrounding development in the immediate area, and in conformance with City requirements. Findings for a recommendation for approval, as noted in the attached Resolutions, can be made. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City Council Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-411. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2001-075. I..J„ ].J1 G:\W PDOCS\V MPCStfRDt. W PD 1 ermu� .n�nnmi�no�rsna� 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001- , recommending to the City Council approval of Change of Zone 2001-067. 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2001-051, subject to the findings and conditions. 5. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Village Use Permit 2000-007, subject to the findings and conditions. 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000- , recommending to the City Council approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map 30043, subject to the findings and conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. ALRC Minutes February 7, 2001 3. Specific Plan 2000-051 Document and Tentative Tract Map 30043 (large copies Planning Commission only) Prepared by: Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner Submitted by: 1 Christine di lorio, Plan 'ng Manager J;. 152 G A W P D O C S\V M P C Stf RDt. W P D PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411 PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051, VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007 AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30043 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-411 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 27th day of February, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2001-411 for General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 located at the northeastern corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, more particularly described as follows: APN 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment 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 2001-41 1) and has determined that although the proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the assessment and included in the conditions of approval and a Mitigated 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 recommending certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1 . The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2001-411. G:\WPD0CS\WAPCResEA41 1 .wpd 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 4. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 3004'13 do 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 have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project. 6. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Zone Change 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 and Vesting Tract Map 30043 will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. 8. The Planning Commission has considered the Environmental Assessment 2001- 41 1 and the Environmental Assessment reflects the independent judgement of the City. 9. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. t G:\WPDOCS\VKIPCResEA41 1 . wpd 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 2001-411 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. 3. That Environmental Assessment 2001-411 reflects the independent judgement of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of February, 2001, 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 155 G:\WPD0CS\V10PCResEA41 1. wpd Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2001-075, Change of Zone 2001-067, Specific Plan 2001-051, Village Use Permit 2001-007 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Christine di lorio 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: Northeast corner of Calle Tampico and Eisenhower Drive. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: KSL Development Corporation 55920 PGA Boulevard La Quinta, CA 92253 6. General Plan Designation: Current: Village Commercial & Medium High Density Residential Proposed: Village Commercial 7. Zoning: Current: Village Commercial and Medium High 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.) General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone to change Medium High Density Residential land to Village Commercial on a portion of a 33 acre site. Specific Plan to establish design guidelines and development standards for 227 whole ownership single family dwellings with the leasig potential of 365 guest rooms, 20,000 square feet of retail commercial, 20,600 square feet of corporate office space, a 40,000 square foot distribution center and 630 employee parking spaces. Village Use Permit for review of the development plan for the residential guest room buildings and the 20,600 s.f. Corporate office building. Vesting Tract Map to divide the land into 16 lots and 17 lettered lots. 9. Surrounding Lane Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: La Quinta Evacuation Channel, golf course at Duna La Quinta South: Calle Tampico, generally vacant Village Commercial lands East: Vacant Village Commercial lands, recently approved for hotel and commercial development West: Eisenhower Drive, golf course 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District a, i 156 G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD 1 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 Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services Hydrology and Water Quality Recreation Land Use Planning Transportation/Traffic Mineral Resources Utilities and Service Systems Noise Mandatory Findings Population and Housing 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. find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Fol u 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. El 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. Signature Date Christine di Iorio Printed Name CITY OF LA OUINTA For G:\WPDOCS\VIVIEA Cklst.WPD x,:l;. .15 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except 'No Impact' answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact' answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact' answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) 'Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) 'Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from 'Potentially Significant Impact' to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVIII, 'Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. g) 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 -1. 5.S G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving 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 FIR, 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) 11. 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 non-agricultural use? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29, 5-32) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Aerial photographs) III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria 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? (Application materials) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X 0 0 9 X X M X G:\WPDOCS\VIVIEA Cklst.WPD �' J;7 e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Application materials) I I X 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? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01) 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? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01) 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? (LSA, letter report, 1/17/01) 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? (LSA, letter report, l/17/01) e) Conflict with, any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (La Quinta Municipal Code; General Plan) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (LSA, letter report, 1 /17/01) 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? ("Historical/ Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," CRM Tech, 1 /8/2001) 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)? ("Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," CRM Tech, 1/8/2001) c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (General Plan FIR p. 4-77 ff.) I'A X X U X X ro KI X G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD F tl d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of X formal cemeteries? ("Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," CRM Tech, 1/8/2001) VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-P'riolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General Plan FIR, 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 EIR, page 4-30 ff.) 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-I-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (General Plan FIR, page 4-30 ff.) 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) X X X X X X X X X 94 X X G:\WPDOCS\VPAEA Cklst.WPD e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-11) h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) Vill. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-26, 6-27) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off - site? (Preliminary Hydrology Report, MDS Consulting, 1/17/01) 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, MDS Consulting, 1/17/01) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (Preliminary Hydrology Report, MDS Consulting, 1/17/01) 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) i7 X X G1 X X X X X X X IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan Project Description) I I X G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD 3 1 �, 1622 7 b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local costal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan Land Use Element) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5- 5) X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) 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? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, 1 /16/01) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, 1/16/01) c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ("Noise Impact Analysis," LSA, 1/16/01) 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? (Application Materials) 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) 0 K1 X 91 VA X X M X M I.7 X G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD X. t' .1 VJ XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection?(General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Police protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9 ff. ) Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 ff. ) XIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application Materials) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials) 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)?("Traffic Impact Analysis," Endo Engineering, 1/16/01) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? ("Traffic Impact Analysis," Endo Engineering, 1/16/01) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (Application Materials) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ("Traffic Impact Analysis," Endo Engineering, 1/16/01) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials) g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application Materials) 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 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X x. L G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-27) d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, page 4-20) e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve 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 4-20) 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. X X X 11 X a X ti X 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 I5063(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. 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. G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD 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. Paleontological Lakebed Delineation Map, City of La Quinta. City of La Quinta Municipal Code "Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report," prepared by CRM Tech, January 8, 2001. "Vista Montana Village Use Permit Traffic Impact Analysis," prepared by Endo Engineering, January 16, 2001. Letter Report regarding biological resources prepared by LSA, January 17, 2001. "Vista Montana Development Noise Impact Analysis," prepared by LSA, January 16, 2001. "Preliminary Hydrology Report," prepared by MDS Consulting, January 17, 2002. �r G:\WPDOCS\VMEA Cklst.WPD mu�nemmm�s�l� Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2001-412 a) & c) Calle Tampico and Eisenhower Drive are both Primary Image Corridors in the General Plan. In addition, the intersection of Eisenhower and Calle Tampico is designated for Primary Gateway Treatment, and the intersection of Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas is designated a Secondary Gateway Treatment. This designation requires that special landscaping, building heights and building setbacks be incorporated into project design. The Specific Plan and Village Use Permit have incorporated these standards, with the exception of building height. The proposed residential project is planned for a maximum 37 foot height, which is 2 feet above the height limit in the Village Commercial Zone. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. The maximum building height in the residential component of the proposed project shall be 35 feet. I. d) The proposed project will occur on a currently vacant parcel which does not generate any light, and will therefore represent an increase in light levels for the area. The project will, however, be required to meet the City's standards for outdoor lighting, which will ensure that lighting is directed downward and contained within the project site. These standards will mitigate the potential impacts of light and glare to a less than significant level. III. a), c) & d) The proposed project is consistent with the Village Commercial land use designation assigned to the site. The northerly one-third, currently designated for Medium High Density Residential, is proposed for Village Commercial designation. A high density residential project on this site would generate a comparable number of trips as the residential component of the proposed project. Similar land uses were analysed as part of the General Plan EIR. The proposed project will result in 227 whole ownership single family dwellings with the Leasing potential for 365 guest rooms, 20,000 square feet of retail commercial development, 20,600 of commercial office development, a 40,000 square foot distribution center, and an employee parking lot. The traffic study prepared for the proposed project estimates that the project at buildout will generate 4,370 trips'. As shown in the Table below, the project will not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Endo Engineering, January, 2001 ;1 16? G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD Running Exhaust Emissions (pounds/day) PM10 PM10 PM10 CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires 45 mph 215.12 9.65 38.59 -- 0.96 0.96 Daily Threshold* 550 75 100 150 Based on 4,370 trips/day and average trip length of 10.0 miles, using EMFAC7G 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). 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: No earth moving activity shall be undertaken without the review and approval of a FIM10 Management Plan. The applicant shall submit same to the City Engineer for review and approval. 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. F " G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD - n 8. All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion until the site is constructed upon. Pad sites which are to remain undeveloped shall be seeded with eiither a desert wildflower mix or grass seed. 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. 1. 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. 13. The project shall provide for non -motorized transportation facilities and shall implement all feasible measures to encourage the use of alternate transportation measures. 14. Bicycle racks and/or other mandated alternative transportation provisions shall be included in project design, in conformance with City ordinances in effect at the time of development. 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 the transit route improvements in the future which may occur at the project site are not included in the analysis. Further, the air quality impacts from the proposed project fall within what was studied in the General Plan EIR. The City determined at that time that air quality impacts associated with the buildout of the City required a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which determined that the impacts to air quality of development of the Plan would be cumulatively significant when considered in conjunction with regional development, and that the City would implement all feasible measures to reduce emissions within its boundaries. IV. a) A biological survey was conducted for the proposed project2. The survey found that -the site provides poor habitat due to previous disturbances on the site. Although common species were found at the time of the survey, no threatened species are expected to occur on the site. No mitigation measures are necessary. Z Letter report prepared by LSA, January, 2001. 169 s, J; G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD V. b) A cultural resource survey and testing program was conducted for the subject property'. The survey and testing found that no resources occur on the site. The report further finds that it is possible that buried artifacts could be encountered during the construction process. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: Should any earth moving activity on the site uncover a potential archaeological resource, all activity on the site shall stop until such time as a qualified archaeologist has evaluate the resource, and recommended mitigation measures. The archaeologist shall also be required to submit to the Community Development Department, for review and approval, a written report on all activities on the site. VI. a) i) & ii) The proposed project lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the event of a major earthquake. In order to mitigate and protect the City from this hazard, the City has adopted the Uniform Building Code, and the associated construction requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the preparation of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of grading plans (please see below). This requirement will ensure that impacts from ground failure are reduced to a less than significant level. This mitigation will be sufficient to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. VI. b) & c) The site is not located in a blowsand hazard area. As discussed above, the soils on the proposed site are loose silty sand. Sandy soils must be properly compacted prior to construction to assure long-term stability. The City's standards for site preparation shall be adhered to, as required by the City Engineer. 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 structure(s) being constructed. VIII. a) The proposed project will be required to retain the 100 year, 24 hour storm on - site. 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. Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey and Testing Report, prepared by CRM Tech, January, 2001. 17 i j G:\WPDOCS\Vlvl EA Add.WPD VIII. b) All development adds to demand for groundwater. 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 project will be required to retain storm flows on -site, which will encourage percolation of storm water into the ground. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's standards for water conserving plumbing fixtures. Finally, the proposed project will be required to meet the requirements of the City's water -conserving landscaping ordinance, which requires that projects demonstrate that landscaping plans are water -efficient. These mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. c)-e) The proposed project, through the construction of buildings and parking lots, will create impermeable surfaces, which will change drainage patterns in a rain event. The project site is located in an AO Flood Zone. The project will,be required to meet the City's standards for retention of the 100 year storm on - site. This will control the amount of runoff which exits the site during a storm. The site's drainage plan will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. This will ensure that impacts to the City's flood control system are reduced to a less than significant level. VIII. f) & g) The proposed project is located in an AO flood zone. The City Engineer will require that all structures on the site are constructed above the potential flood level in this zone. This standard will serve to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level. XI. a) & c) A noise impact analysis was prepared for the proposed project°. Noise impacts exceeding the City's standards will occur during construction activities. At buildout, however, the proposed project will meet the City's current exterior noise standard for sensitive receptors. Construction mitigation measures are offered below. These mitigation measures will ensure that impacts from noise are reduced to less than significant levels. 1 . All construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. On -site generators, if required, shall be located in the northern portion of the site. ° Noise Impact Analysis, prepared by LSA, January, 2001. G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD XIII. a) The construction of the proposed project will result in short-term potential impacts for both police and fire services. The property, once developed, will generate sales and use tax and property tax. These taxes will contribute to the City's General Fund, and off -set the potential impact to police and fire service. 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. In addition, the revenues generated by the site will result in sales tax for the City, which will offset any needs for additional municipal services. The project will also be required to pay school fees, as required by law. The proposed project is not expected to have a significant impact on municipal services or facilities. XV. a) & b) A traffic analysis was prepared for the proposed project'. The analysis found that the proposed project will generate approximately 4,370 trips per day at buildout. The analysis found that surrounding intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service, with or without the proposed project. Minor alterations to lane geometries will be required to accommodate the project, and are listed below under mitigation measures. The study further found that signa[zation would not be necessary for either the project entrance on Calle Tampico or that on Eisenhower Drive. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico will be fully improved to their General Plan half -widths adjacent to the project site. 2. All project exits will be STOP sign controlled. 3. The project proponent will contribute his fair share to the signalization of Eisenhower and Calle Tampico. 4. The project proponent shall provide lane geometries as depicted in Figure VI-2 of the Traffic Analysis, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 5. The project proponent will participate in the City's Impact Fee program. The implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the potential impacts to the circulation system to a less than significant level. XV. d) The project proposes a right -in, right -out access onto Calle Tampico, between Avenida Bermudas and the primary site access. The distance between these 5 Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Endo Engineering, January, 2001. d G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD XV. f) drives may not be sufficient to allow for safe ingress and egress. In order to ensure that this potential impact is mitigated, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: A right -in, right -out access on Calle Tampico, between Avenida Bermudas and the primary access point to the project, will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. Said access point shall meet all City standards for separation between driveways. If these standards cannot be met, the access point shall not be permitted. The commercial retail component of the proposed project includes the potential for restaurant land uses. The parking on this portion of the site, however, has been calculated for general retail use, which is much less stringent than restaurant use. Should large portions of the retail square footage be dedicated to restaurant use, the site would have insufficient parking. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. Restaurant use within the Commercial Retail component of the proposed project shall be limited to 5,000 square feet gross floor area. XVI. a)-f) The construction of the proposed project will have an impact on utilities and public services. However, the overall impacts of the project on these services is not expected to be significant, insofar as these suppliers will charge the business operators for their services, and provide improvements to these services as needed. In addition, connection fees will be required of the project proponent at construction of the project. These fees and charges will mitigate the potential impacts to a less than significant level. G:\WPDOCS\VM EA Add.WPD ►j 7 z 0 E� d U O F U h a a � � U � U d w F a c w U a .4 0 U U a w � a � o u U G C � O a N C a C7 0 u F � O .s a`. a o _E a � o r> U o �q E r 3 O U o � z o � Ocl E £ C M b i iF�l O N c6 U U °°� V ww E 'a c c z to o en n n c c CQ i 0 OIn F Y U U W U 6 U 7D O 17 Y H 3 � I a = )) \� § � 3 } ; \[ )) /k 2 ) z ) 2 = �) 2 ; / 5 2 0 2 2 zz ]73 ■ 4we k( Eu ! \ \ E « % } ./ g ( 5 J \ ] \ ) { 0 ° p \ / \ /}\)\ ) , k /) ` 4 \ u .\ 2T .2 F \\) i zt/ / z&i \\±% )7 �) E Cu )k o" °� E � /k � \ \ \ ƒ \ \ \ \ \ u = _ = u u = u = � [ \\ \ ) \ /) — ƒE to_ u uto \ \ \ j \ t\ § \ \ 2 k § § ƒ § \ .\ \ E 4 5 4ƒ m 2 ® E_ \; 3 B / \ 7 § / .9 § / \ \ 7 } u \ a2 17R \ \� \� ) § u ( ; )E )) /k 2 ) ) ( � 4 a ; } ( ® } 7 } \ !S \� 2 � � 3 34@ yt�o § � / k/ ) \ CA (\ / »§ 2 \{ � j\ § Q \ u _ \ \} § } ( \® - \ \ ) 97f j j( ±) Eu § � \\ 3 kƒ; /j/ E _ § ` - }) \\\ )i k/ \ ({ ; 2 \\ ) \\ / ( � y ƒ\ .172 Ln \ \� \� \ § E 2 � (y )k \k �2 b § k § \\ \ \ \§ k \ \5 \� � 7 � \ / 32 9 ` ■ /) /2\/ k/ \\ £2 ,& ®6 $i ■ / bp .2 {/ 3 E bo �§ ■ \2 \ \ 2 \ \ \\ < m\ ; / \\ \\ \ \ \\ - � j \ ; z 2 = 6 \- \ [/ / 2 [ \ \ / 2 § \\ 7 o }\ k z \ 2 § u \ ; \ \ 2 f&} / \ \j )) �u A5 - « ( � 3 u d 2 / § § e ) � / z - �� / �\ �2 § ■ ƒ , 2 ) _ & _ Q■ ƒ [� 4 \ IT, / � \ i! ° / \ (b )\ 2§ 2d \§ \U ) ) \ \ / ? / ® § w ) ; \\ j j2 \ § § \ \ § ( F \ §§ ( j© \ a z - \ \ T\/ \ \� \� \ } \ \ § \\\ \\ \\ �- $ & & \ j / # ( - &�- = % <# # } a � \ \ \ 4 \ \ \z ]9) j \/ k� uu ! 3 2 u y k e \9 k) \/ $2 ■ 2� k - 2 \z \§ J9\ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GPA 2001-075 TO CHANGE MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL ON A PORTION OF A 33 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE LA QUINTA EVACUATION CHANNEL AND EAST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE CASE NO.: GPA 2001-075 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development Corp. for review of a General Plan Amendment to assign a land use designation of Village Commercial to a portion of 33 acres located at the southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, and more specifically dlescribed as follows: APNs 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said General Plan Amendment: 1 . Internal General Plan Consistency. The proposed amendment to the Land Use Map would change the designation from Medium High Density Residential to Village Commercial. The proposed amendment is an existing land use designation in the General Plan. The proposed amendment maintains consistency within the other General Plan elements, insofar as the Village Commercial designation is predominant in this area of the General Plan Land Use Map. The continued development of a mix of uses is consistent with the goals of the General Plan for this area of the City. 2. Public Welfare. The proposed project requires the extension of all public services to the site as part of project development. In addition, conditions of approval and environmental mitigation measures have been included for this project which address safety and welfare issues, including noise, flooding and seismic safety. As the Specific Plan is built out, through the Village Use Permit process, site -specific issues which might affect the public health and safety will be further addressed. 3. General Plan Compatibility. The proposed General Plan amendment will be compatible with the surrounding designations in the project area, insofar as the Village Commercial land use designation is predominant in this part of the City. 1871 Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ General Plan Amendment 2001-075 KSL Development Corp. 4. Property Suitability. The property is well suited to commercial development, being (primarily flat, and having adequate access to major roadways. 5. Change in Circumstances. The continued development of the Village requires a unified General Plan designation for this area, in order to meet the goals of the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 2000-411 assessed the environmental concerns of the General Plan Amendment; and, 3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of GPA 2001-075 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as contained in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part of. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of February, 2001, 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 X . 1 V C EXHIBIT "All -1v z 0 Existing Land Use Designations • MKDR :MDR' w 4-1 G vc ............. vc iMDR-4 L Proposed Land Use Designatic ;MDR* VC :-Vc c IMP F-f4 t A. 6 187 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 ZONE CHANGE FROM MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL ON A PORTION OF A 33 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE LA QUINTA EVACUATION CHANNEL AND EAST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE. CASE NO.: ZC 2001-067 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development: Corp. for review of a Zone Change to change the zoning designation on a portion of 33 acres at the southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, more particularly described as: APNs 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Zone Change: 1. Consistency with General Plan. The proposed amendment to the Land Use Map would change the designation from Medium High Density Residential to Village Commercial. The proposed amendment is an existing land use designation in the General Plan. The proposed amendment maintains consistency within the other General Plan elements, insofar as the entire project site is within the boundary of the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines. The proposed Zone Change will maintain the consistency between the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance required by law. 2. Public Welfare. The proposed project requires the extension of all public services to the site as part of project development. In addition, conditions of approval and environmental mitigation measures have been included for this project which address safety and welfare issues, including noise, flooding and seismic safety. As the Specific Plan is built out, through the Zone Change process, site -specific issues which might affect the public health and safety will be further addressed. 3. General Plan Compatibility. The proposed General Plan amendment will be compatible with the surrounding designations in the project area, insofar as the Village Commercial land use designation is predominant in this part of the City. n G:\WPD0CS\V1V1PCResoCZ.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Change of Zone 2001-067 KSL Development Corp. 4. Property Suitability. The property is well suited to commercial development, being primarily flat, and having adequate access to major roadways. 5. Change in Circumstances. The continued development of the Village requires a unified zoning designation for this area, in order to meet the goals of the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 2000-41 1 assessed the environmental concerns of the Zone Change; and, 3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Zone Change 2001-067 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as contained in the attached Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part of. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of February, 2001, 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 l89 G:\W PDOCS\V NIPCResoCZ.wpd EXHI BIT "A" �� S c l II . r � .•�t Existing Zoning Designations W � W J RM FP , �_ �, !GG VC M w� •r . .i r � � w r• _• r • r W _ 1 2 2- ' Proposed Zoning Designation FP °� RM VC VC ; G C L w:. � L , I fop z , 1,M PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A COMMERCIAL/OFFICE, DISTRIBUTION CENTER AND 227 WHOLE OWNERSHIP SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS WITH THE LEASING POTENTIAL OF 354 GUEST ROOMS ON 33 ACRES AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND CALLE TAMPICO CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-051 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for the Vista Montana project for review of a Specific Plan to allow design guidelines and development standards for a commercial/office, distribution center and 227 whole ownership siingle family dwellings with the leasing potential of 354 guest rooms on 33 acres at the northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, more particularly described as: APN 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering Environmental Assessment 2001-411, and all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Specific Plan: The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan, the Land Use Map for the General Plan and supports the development of the proposed project, as conditioned. 2. The proposed Specific Plan is compatible with the City's Zoning Ordinance and the Village Design Guidelines in that it provides standards for the proposed land uses. 3. The proposed Specific Plan will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be compatible with surrounding development, and conform with the City's standards and requirements, as conditioned. 4. Development of the proposed Specific Plan is compatible with the parcel on which it is proposed, and surrounding land uses, as conditioned. G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResoSP.WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 Conditions of Approval NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby require compliance with the Conditions of Approval for the proposed Specific Plan; 3. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 2001-411 assessed the environmental concerns of this Specific Plan; and, 4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Specific Plan 2001-051 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of February, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: TERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Cluinta, California 192 G:\WPDoCS\VJ\APCResoSP.WPD PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-075 - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 2001-051 - VISTA MONTANA FEBRUARY 2'.7, 2001 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 tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. Right of way dedications required of this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1 . Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - 32 foot half of 64 foot right of way, up to the point of street vacation. Note: Applicant shall submit application for street vacation as a separate action. Street vacation application shall be compatible with Santa Rosa Plaza requirements (east side of Avenida Bermudas). 2. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right of way. 3. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right of way. B. PRIVATE STREETS 1. Residential Entry Drive (off Calle Tampico): Minimum 40-foot width, back of curb to back of curb to a point past the first right hand turn available to in -bound traffic. 2. Residential Entry Drive (off Eisenhower Drive): Minimum 40 ft. width, back of curb to back of curb. 3. Residential: 31-foot minimum width back of curb to back of curb. 1.93 G:\WPD0CS\WAPCResoSP.WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Specifc Plan 2001-051 Conditions of Approval On -street parking is prohibited and provisions shall be made for adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors. The CC&R's shall contain language requiring the Homeowner's Association to provide for ongoing enforcement of the restrictions. C. CULS DE SAC For culs de sac use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset) with 39.5-foot radius, or larger, or specific design as approved by the City Engineer. For non-standard culs de sac, right of way dedication shall be as required by the City Engineer. 4. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved): A. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet B. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet C. Avenida Bermudas - 10-feet 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. 5. 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. 6. 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 1. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - Construct modification to raised median to include a dedicated left turn lane to the site from eastbound Calle Tampico @ Ave. Mendoza. Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway. The cost of the median lg, G:\WPD0CS\VlVlPCResoSP.VVPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 Conditions of Approval modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact Fee fund in an amount not to exceed the budgeted amount. Eisenhower Drive (Major Arterial) - Construct 38-foot half of 76- foot improvement (travel width, excluding curbs) plus 8 ft. meandering sidewalk. Applicant shall construct the full raised center median. Center median shall include turning pocket for left turn from southbound Eisenhower Drive. Applicant to design improvement to compliment the alignment of the bridge. Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway. The cost of the median modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact Fee fund in an amount not to exceed the budgeted amount. B. PRIVATE STREETS - On -site streets: a. Two -Way Traffic: Construct 28-foot minimum wide full - width improvements (measured gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within the 31-foot right of way. All on -site streets shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City Engineer. b. Project Entry Streets: Construct 37-foot minimum wide full - width improvements (measured gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within the 40-foot right of way. All on -site streets shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City Engineer. C. Cul-de-Sacs: All private cul-de-sac bulbs which contain raised landscaped islands shall be designated as "One way" and applicant shall construct minimum 20-foot wide full - width improvements (measured from gutter flowline to gutter flowline). Design approval and right of way dedication shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer. 2. All on street parking is prohibited and the applicant shall be required to provide for the perpetual enforcement of the restriction by the Homeowners' Association. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approve ,, , y7_ Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 Conditions of Approval construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the City Engineer. MAINTENANCE 7. 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. 8. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 9. 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. 10. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 11. On page 2.6 of the Specific Plan, in Table 1, the maximum square footage of the office building shall be added at 20,600 s.f., and of the retail commercial space at 20,000 s.f. 12. On pages 2.11 (in Table 3) and 3.7 of the Specific Plan, the following shall be added: Maximum restaurant space: 5,000 s.f. 13. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit documents shall be amended to show the location of all trash enclosures on the G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResosP.WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 Conditions of Approval site. The plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. 14. A master signage program shall be submitted for the proposed project, subject to Village Use Permit review, prior to the issuance of building permits. All signage on the site shall conform to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The Specific Plan shall be amended to reflect this requirement (page 2.19). 15. On pages 2.18 through 2.31 of the Specific Plan, the words "whenever possible" and "wherever possible" shall be eliminated. 16. A final landscaping plan, which shows plant size, location, berming and walls shall tie submitted to the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits. Trees along the perimeter of the site shall be a minimum of 24" box. 17. The landscaping plan shall include all frontages on City streets, and shall be installed as part of the first phase of construction on the project site. 18. The word "limited" on pages 3.3 and 3.9 of the Specific Plan shall be eliminated, and the words "no more than 10% of building square footage" shall be added. 19. The second sentence of Item B.2. on page 3.3 of the Specific Plan shall be amended to read Permitted ancillary uses shall include indoor or outdoor professional...." 20. The maximum allowed height in the residential component of the project shall be 35 feet. The Specific Plan shall be amended to reflect this standard. 21. The Table on page 3.5 of the Specific Plan shall be modified to add the maximum number of dwelling units at 227 with the leasign potential for 365 guest rooms. 22. Within the Zoning Regulations section of the Specific Plan, the following shall replace the second sentence of the paragraph immediately following item 8 on page 3.7; and the second sentence of item B. on page 3.11: "All interpretation of permitted uses within this Planning Area shall be made pursuant to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance." 23. On page 3.8 of the Specific Plan, within the Table, the following shall be added: �. 1y7 G:\WPD0CS\VPJ1PCResoSP.WPD ' Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 Conditions of Approval Maximum building area square footage: 20,000 s.f. Parking for Restaurant Use: 1 space per 75 s.f. of GFA. 24. The Specific Plan shall be amended to require that 50% of the residential and 30% of the commercial retail and office parking be covered by a shade structure. Plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 25. On page 3.9 of the Specific Plan, item B., Permitted uses, the sentence beginning "Permitted uses for land designated.." through and including "1. Retail Uses" shall be deleted. 26. On page 3.10, item E., of the Specific Plan, the word "separate" shall be added immediately preceding "Village Use Permit." 27. On page 3.10, Table, of the Specific Plan, the following shall be added: Parking provided: 630 spaces. 28. On page 3.12, Table of the Specific Plan, the following shall be added: Maximum building area square footage: 20,600 s.f. 29. All changes to the Specific Plan which are also included in the Village Use Permit shall be made to the latter to ensure consistency. The project proponent shall submit amended documents within 30 days of City Council approval of the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit. 30. The mitigation measures contained in Environmental Assessment 2001-411 shall be incorporated into the conditions of approval for this project. COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 31. The project proponent shall install suitable facilities to prohibit public access to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. 32. The project proponent shall obtain an encroachment permit from the District prior to any construction within the right-of-way of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. This includes, but is not limited to, surface improvements, drainage inlets, landscaping and roadways. 33. This project shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the District for sanitation service. G:\WPDOCS\VIVIPCResoSP.WPD r 19� Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Specific Plan 2001-051 Conditions of Approval 34. All Bureau of Reclamation facilities on the subject property shall be abandoned prior to issuance of building permits on the site. 35. Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the District for review. 36. This area is within Improvement District No. 1 of the District for irrigation water service. Water from the Coachella Canal is available and shall be used for green belt irrigation purposes. 37. The Table on page 3.5 of the Specific Plan shall be amended to read: Minimum Parking: 1 space per lock -off bedroom. G:\WPDOCS\VN1PCResoSP.WPD 1 193 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL GUEST ROOMS AND A 20,600 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING ON A 33 ACRE SITE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND CALLE TAMPICO. CASE NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2000-007 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development Corp. for review of development plans for residential guest rooms and a 20,600 square foot office building on a portion of a 33 acre site located on the northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, more particularly described as: APN 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for the City of La Quinta did, on the 7th day of February, 2001 recommend approval of the proposed project, by adoption of Minute Motion 2001-006, subject to conditions of approval; WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering Environmental Assessment 2001-41 1, and all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Village Use Permit: 1. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the General Plan goals, policies and programs relating to the Village Commercial land use designation, and supports resort residential and commercial opportunities for the residents and visitors to the Cove. 2. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the standards of Specific Plan 2000-051, which establishes development standards for the project. 3. The proposed Village Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be compatible with surrounding development, and conform with the City's standards and requirements, as conditioned. 4. The proposed Village Use Permit complies with the architectural design standards for Specific Plan 2000-051, and implements the high quality standards called for in that document. L �� 0 G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResoVUP.WPD _ nw�nimm�RlN�lAll� Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Village Use Permit 2001-007 5. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the landscaping standards and palette in Specific Plan 2000-051. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That it does hereby approve Village Use Permit 2000-007, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; and 3. That lit does hereby confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 2001-411 assessed the environmental concerns of this Village Use Permit. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of February, 2001, 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 ,. 201 G:\WPD0CS\VrAPCResoVUP.WPD PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- CONDITION S OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-007 - VISTA MONTANA FEBRUARY 27, 2001 GENERAL: 1 . The maximum square footage of the office building shall be added at 20,600 s.f. 2. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit documents shall be amended to show the location of all trash enclosures on the site. The plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. 3. A master signage program shall be submitted for the proposed project, subject to Village Use Permit review, prior to the issuance of building permits. All signage on the site shall conform to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. A final landscaping plan, which shows plant size, location, berming and walls shall be submitted to the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits. Trees along the perimeter of the site shall be a minimum of 24" box. 5. The landscaping plan shall include all frontages on City streets, and shall be installed as part of the first phase of construction on the project site. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the office building elevations shall include the depth of the window insets and design treatment as well as the texture of the wall to be similar to the residential component. 7. The word "limited" shall be eliminated, and the words "no more than 10% of building square footage" shall be added. 8. The permitted uses in the Commercial Residential and Commercial Office shall be made consistent with the final Specific Plan. 9. The maximum allowed height in the residential component of the project shall be 35 feet. 10. The maximum number of dwelling units allowed in the residential VUP is 227 with the leasing potential of 365 guest rooms. 202 G:\WPD0CS\V1APCResoVUP.WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Village Use Permit 2001-007 11. 50% of the residential and 30% of the commercial retail and office parking be covered by a shade structure. Plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 12. All changes to the Specific Plan which are also included in the Village Use Permit shall be made to the latter to ensure consistency. The project proponent shall submit amended documents within 30 days of City Council approval of the Specific Plan and Village Use Permit. 203 G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResoVUP.WPD PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE SUBDIVISION OF A 33 ACRE PARCEL INTO 16 PARCELS AND 17 LETTERED LOTS. CASE NO.: VESTING TRACT MAP 30043 APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of February, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL Development: Corp., in order to subdivide a 33 acre parcel into 16 numbered lots and 17 lettered lots, generally located at the northeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Calle Tampico, more particularly described as: APN 773-022-014 and 773-022-032 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Vesting Tract Map 30043: Finding Number 1 - Consistency with General Plan: A. The property is designated Village Commercial. The Land Use Element of the General Plan encourages mixed use development in this land use designation. The project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) because mixed use land uses are proposed. Finding Number 2 - Consistency with City Zoning Ordinance: A. The proposed retail development is consistent with the land uses specified in the Zoning Ordinance, as conditioned. Modifications to the City's standards, which are included in Specific Plan 2001-051, are justified. Finding Nurnber 3 - Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act: A. Parcel Map 30043 is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act per Public Resources Code Section 65457(a)• An Environmental Assessment (EA 2000-411) has been prepared, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been proposed. G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResoVTM.WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 Finding Number 4 - Site Design: A. The proposed design of the subdivision conforms with the development standards found in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, as modified in the Specific Plan. B. The site is physically suitable for the proposed land division, as the area is flat and without physical constraints, and the Vesting Tract map is consistent with other parcels surrounding the project site. Finding Number 5 - Site Improvements: A. Storm water retention will be provided on -site, and conveyed to existing storm water systems adjacent to the site. B. Infrastructure improvements such as gas, electric, sewer and water will service the site in underground facilities as required. No adverse impacts have been identified based on letters of response from affected public agencies. 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 confirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 2001 -411 assessed the environmental concerns of this Vesting Tract Map; and, 3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Vesting Tract Map 30043 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of February, 2001, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 20 G:\W PDOCS\VMPCResoVTM.WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001. STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California 20� G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResoVTM. WPD PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-075 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30043 - VISTA MONTANA FEBRUARY 27, 2001 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 tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. 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) State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB) 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. This project shall conform to the requirements of the NPDES General Permit. The applicant shall submit a copy of the SWQCB 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. Final maps under this tentative map shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of final map approval. 207 G AWPDOCS\V NIPCResoVTM.WPD �rnuou�wnnn�n�n Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to final approval of the General Plan Amendment application, the applicant shall apply for and acquire a street vacation on the effected portion of Avenida Bermudas and acquire the property rights to that portion of Avenida Bermudas that will belong to the property owner on the east side of Bermudas following the vacation, comprising that portion of Bermudas east of the current roadway centerline as depicted on Tentative Tract Map 30043. Applicant shall also acquire or confer easements and other property rights required of future tentative map(s) 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 . Avenida Bermudas (Collector) - 32 foot half of 64 foot right of way, up to the point of street vacation. Note: Applicant shall submit application for street vacation as a separate action. Street vacation application shall be compatible with Santa Rosa Plaza requirements (east side of Avenida Bermudas). 2. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right of way. 3. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 50 foot half of 100 foot right of way. B. PRIVATE STREETS Residential Entry Drive (off Calle Tampico): Minimum 40-foot width, back of curb to back of curb to a point past the first right hand turn available to in -bound traffic. 2. Residential Entry Drive (off Eisenhower Drive): Minimum 40 ft. width, back of curb to back of curb. G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResoVTM.WPD 203 Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 3. Residential: 31-foot minimum width back of curb to back of curb. On -street parking is prohibited and provisions shall be made for adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors. The CC&R's shall contain language requiring the Homeowner's Association to provide for ongoing enforcement of the restrictions. C. CULS DE SAC 1 . For culs de sac use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset) with 39.5-foot radius, or larger, or specific design as approved by the City Engineer. For non-standard culs de sac, right of way dedication shall be as required by the City Engineer. 8. 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, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 10. 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. 11. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved): A. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet B. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - 20-feet C. Avenida Bermudas - 10-feet 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. 12. 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. 20 G:\WPDoCS\VMPCResoVTM.WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 13. 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 Specific Plan. 14. 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. 15. 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 owner's. 16. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted of recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval of this tentative map by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer. GRADING 17. A substantial portion of this project site is within the Special Flood Hazard Area inundated by a 100-year flood as identified by the Flood Insurance Rate Map. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations). The development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been met. 18. Prior to issuance of any grading permit(s), 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. 19. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape 210 G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResoVTM.WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 20. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots within a tract or parcel map, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. The limits given in this condition and the previous condition are not entitlements and more restrictive limits may be imposed in the map approval or plan checking process. if compliance with the limits is impractical, however, the City will consider alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 21. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, 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. 22. 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. 23. 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. 24. Prior to any disturbance of the site, the applicant shall furnish verification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board that an NPDES Notice of Intent has been filed. Applicant shall also provide a copy of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for this development project. DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 25. Applicant is required to file a Notice of Intent (NOO with the State Water Quality Control Board comply with the terms of the NPDES General Permit. Provisions 211 G:\W PDOCS\VIV PCResoVTM. WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 of the General Permit also require the applicant to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). 26. Stormvvater 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. 27. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual - lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2_ 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. 28. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route. 29. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site or passed through to the overflow outlet. 30. The property must continue to accept off -site storm water from Eisenhower Drive that currently drains to the property. Applicant shows an existing stormwater inlet on the east and west sides of Eisenhower Drive that drains to the southwest corner of the property. This stormwater utility does not appear to exist. Applicant shall provide drainage for this section of Eisenhower Drive in a manner approved by the City Engineer. 31. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data which shall be submitted for checking with the retention facility plans. The design percolation rate shall not exceed two inches per hour. 32. 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. 33. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in an approved manner. 34. 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. 35. The applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under 212 G:\WPDOCS\VV1 PCReSOVTM. W PD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2,001 the site specific, City, or regional NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisiions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. 36. The project 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 37. 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. 38. 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. 39. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 40. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1 . Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial) - Construct modification to raised median to include a dedicated left turn lane to the site from eastbound Calle Tampico @ Ave. Mendoza. 213 G:\WPDoCS\VMPCResoVTM.WPD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway. The cost of the median modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact Fee fund in an amount not to exceed the budgeted amount. 2. Eisenhower Drive (Major Arterial) - Construct 38-foot half of 76- foot improvement (travel width including bicycle lane, excluding curbs) plus 6 ft. meandering sidewalk. Applicant shall construct the full raised center median. Center median shall include turning pocket for left turn from southbound Eisenhower Drive. Applicant to design improvement to compliment the alignment of the future bridge. 3. Applicant shall bear the cost of roadway improvements on the outer twenty (20) feet of the roadway. The cost of the median modifications shall be reimbursed from the Development Impact Fee fund in an amount not to exceed the budgeted amount. B. PRIVATE STREETS - On -site streets: a. Two -Way Traffic: Construct 28-foot minimum wide full - width improvements (measured gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within the 31-foot right of way. All on -site streets shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City Engineer. b. Project Entry Streets: Construct 37-foot minimum wide full - width improvements (measured gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within the 40-foot right of way. All on -site streets shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City Engineer. C. Cul-de-Sacs: All private cul-de-sac bulbs which contain raised landscaped islands shall be designated as "One way" and applicant shall construct minimum 20-foot wide full - width improvements (measured from gutter flowline to gutter flowline). Design approval and right of way dedication shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer. B. All on street parking is prohibited and the applicant shall be required to provide for the perpetual enforcement of the restriction by the Homeowners' Association. 21 G:\WPDOCS\V M PCReso V TM. W PD Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 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. 41. 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. 42. 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). 43. 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. 44. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 45. Public 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. On -site private streets shall have a wedge curb, the design of which shall be approved by the City Engineer. The lip of the wedge curb 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. 46. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" G:\WPDOCS\VM PC ResoVTM.WPD 1 21 ti Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 47. 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. 48. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the project or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. 49. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Main project entry (Off Calle Tampico across from Avenida Mendoza). No restrictions applied to turning movements at this location. B. Main project entry (Off Eisenhower Drive) - To be located approximately 645 feet north of the centerline of Calle Tampico along Eisenhower Drive. Access and egress will be restricted to right turn in, right turn out and left turn in. C. Avenida Bermudas - No restrictions applied to turning movements at this location. LANDSCAPING 50. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common lots, and park areas. 51. 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 21� G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResoVTM.WPD nn�11nI�Iw11n111AlIMi Planning Commission Resolution 2001- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Vesting Tract Map 30043 September 27, 2001 the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 52. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. PUBLIC SERVICES 53. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline Transiit and approved by the City Engineer. MAINTENAPJCE 54. 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 55. 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. 2P^ G:\WPDOCS\VMPCResoVTKWPD ATTACHMENT #2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes February 7, 2001 2. Committee Member Bobbitt questioned the /thhadeen submitted as to whether or not there was any iring which bid must be accept. Staff stated noover $3,000 a different bidding procedure has to b 3. Committee Reynolds stated it appears tp6y are bidding on two different things. The bid for $2,900 is fof two coats of paint. The other bid has a sealer and two coats pf paint. Staff stated one of the issues is that there are no plarl'olor specifications required. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that if there are no specifications then different ntractors will bid according to what they think is needed. If e lower bid is acceptable to the the applicant, it should be u to the applicant to make that decision, as long as it is a reput le contractor. 5. Ms. Franco stated Ae would be going with the lower bid. 6. Commissioner PIE ynolds stated it seemed better to have the sealer as it is an old r building. 7. Commissi ner Bobbitt stated it should have the same score as the previou application as it is a continuation of the work previously rev/ieed. 8. Tbeingno discussion, it was moved and seconded by ,ommittee Members Bobbitt/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion , 2001-005 recommending approval of CPIP 008 with a scoring total of 72.5, as the previous application. Unanimously approved. B. Village Use Permit 2001-007; a request of KSL Development Corporation for review of landscaping and architectural plans for the residential and office components of a 33 acre site located on to north side of Calle Tampico, and bounded on the west by Eisenhower Drive and the east by Avenida Bermudas. 1. Planning Manger Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted that due to the generality of the landscaping it be brought back to the ALRC. 2. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project, and stated he had no objections to the conditions as submitted by staff. 21? G:\WPDOCS\ALRC2-7-Ol.wpd 2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes February 7, 2001 3. Mr. Frank Stalls, South Coast Architects made a presentation on the architectural plans. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the existing height restrictions. Staff stated they were 35 -feet for the buildings and any buildings along an Image Corridor, within 150 feet of the right- of-way, cannot exceed 22 feet in height. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if they exceed that height. Staff stated yes, but the Planning Commission would address this issue at their meeting. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what the actual use of the buildings would be. Mr. Haag stated they will be single family attached, whole ownership partnership that can include lock off guest rooms. An individual unit can lock off a room and lease it. Planning Manager Christi di lorio stated they are designed for to allow individual rooms to be locked off. 5. Committee Member Reynolds asked if they could be used by the La Quinta Hotel as rentals. Mr. Haag stated yes. With the success of the Resort Homes at the Hotel, the owners of these units can allow the Hotel to use the keyed rooms for rentals. KSL has not yet defined how that leasing will work. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if it is like a condo, pud, and who will maintain the grounds. Mr. Haag stated there will be an HOA who will be responsible for the common area with their HOA dues. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the building maintenance will be handled by HOA. Mr. Haag stated yes. 7. Committee Member Reynolds stated that when this area was considered for an elementary school there was problems with the access off of Eisenhower Drive and a determination was made that it should be a right in and out. Mr. Haag stated the traffic study stated that at the City's buildout, they were directed to use the City's traffic engineer and he determined that no left turn out would be allowed. There would be a right in and out on Eisenhower Drive. As there is room in the median a left turn in would be allowed with no traffic signal. Full turn movement would be allowed at the Calle Tampico entrance. At the office site it would have a full turn movement at Avenida Bermudas. 8. Mr. Jack Di Benedetto, representing Williams Scotsman, stated they were a modular contractor, and the plan is to fabricate the frame of the buildings (commercial coach) in Riverside and transport them in sections to the site. He proceeded to explain the 21.9 G:AWPDOCSVALRC2-7-01.wpd 3 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes February 7, 2001 construction of the units. The modulars will be used as the KSL corporate headquarters. Mr Haag stated the veneers proposed for this commercial coach will replicate the feel of the residential component of this site. Mr. Di Benedetto stated they are unfinished when they arrive. The plan is to have all modules installed and secured within two days. The exterior will be a constructed of plywood with a stucco covering to have the appearance of a residential house. Staff asked what the depth of the widows would be. Mr. Di Benedetto stated they will be inset. The walls will have a ten to 12 inch thick. 9. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the windows need to have the same appearance as the condos. The rendering shows some shutters and others do not and this should be clarified. He does have a concern with the term modular as they can be unsightly and the current ones used by KSL are unsightly. If they have a stucco finish it will improve their appearance. He asked if it was to be a tile roof or mansard. Mr. Di Benedetto stated trusses will be applied on site. Mr. Haag stated it was a shed roof with a parapet. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the air conditioning equipment. Mr. Di Benedetto stated it will be hidden within the roof well. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if it would be a concrete slab foundation. Mr. Di Benedetto stated it will be a monolithic concrete stem wall foundation with concrete supports. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the grade was existing or lower. Mr. Di Benedetto stated it would be 18 inches above the grade. Committee Member Bobbit stated that may be a problem with the type of soils in this area and asked what type of arrangements are being made to get the water out from under the floor. Mr. Di Benedetto stated a concrete slurry seal with drain to storm system system. 10. Committee Member Reynolds asked how many years other modular units that they have installed have lasted. Mr Di Benedetto stated the corporate office buildings were 20 years old. Committee Member Reynolds stated it appears to be a temporary building. Mr. Di Benedetto stated it is anything but temporary. Mr. Don Ferguson, also with Williams Scotsman, stated they have been doing buildings like this especially with the military. Now commercial uses are being used as well as hospitals. Mr. Haag asked the square footage cost of the of these buildings. Mr. Di Benedetto stated approximately $1OO a square foot. Mr. Haag stated that KSL, with their limited timeline for use of their site development permit for their existing location, they are looking to use this type of building because of their fast construction time. G:\WPDOCS\ALRC2-7-Ol.wpd 4 7 1� Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes February 7, 2001 They are becoming an asset to while minimizing the site impacts. Mr. Di Benedetto went on to explain the State building requirements they have to meet. 1 1. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Bobbitt/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion 2001-006 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2000- 007, as recommended. a. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the office building elevations shall include the depth of the window insets and design treatment as well as the texture of the wall to be similar to the residential component. Unanimously approved. C. Site Development Permit 2000-688; a request of John Vuksic, Architectural Project Manager, for building elevations and landscaping plans for two retail buildings located at the northwest corner of Highway 11 and Washington Street within the Point Happy Commercial center. 1. 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. Mr. John Vuksic, architect for the project, made a presentation of the project. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what the uses would be. Mr. Viksic gave the uses. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the widows and surrounds on the windows would be as proposed as he likes the shutters. He was concerned however, about whether or not there was any other treatment that could be applied to them to have them hold up in this weather to not let them dry up and crack. Mr. Vuksic stated they could be made out of metal which would not have the same look. Discussion followed. 4. Committee Member Reynolds stated he had no comment. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Reynolds/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2001-007 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2000-688, subject to the conditions. Unanimously approved. G:\WPDOCS\AL3C2-7-0l.wpd 5 `� 4