2001 05 08 PCPlanning Commission Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-quinta.org
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
May 8, 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 2001-058
Beginning Minute Motion 2001-010
CALL. TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This its 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 April 24, 2001 and joint
meeting with the City Council on April 4, 2001.
B. Department Report
V. PRESENTATIONS: None
PC/AGENDA L U 1
A. Item ...................
CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 94-287
ADDENDUM, SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 AMENDMENT #1,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-047, AND PARCEL MAP
28610
Applicant...........
Agiotage Limited
Location............
Bisected by the future Jefferson Street, approximately a
half mile south of Avenue 58
Request .............
Certification of an EIR Addendum for Specific Plan 94-
025 allowing a new access road for an approved master
planned residential community of 277 houses; 2)
development of a private road on a hillside slope
exceeding 20 percent; 3) amend the Green Specific Plan
to allow a 3,000 foot long private access road along the
north side of a 330.70 acre property to serve ten custom
lots; and 4) a Tentative Parcel Map subdividing 330.70
acres into four parcels and other lettered street lots.
Action ...............
Resolution 2001 , Resolution 2001- , Resolution
2001- , Resolution 2001-
B. Item ...................
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-059
Applicant...........
Sprint PCS
Location............
81-600 Avenue 58, Imperial Irrigation District
Request .............
Installation of telecommunication apparatus to be located
on an existing 100 foot high tower.
Action ...............
Resolution 2001-
C. Item ...................
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-701 - EAGLES BEND
Applicant...........
CRV La Quinta 70, LLC - Peter Bilicki
Location............
Northwest corner of Bellerive and Winged Foot within
PGA West
Request .............
Review of architectural and landscape plans for two new
prototype residential units with three facades each.
Action ...............
Resolution 2001-
D. Item ................... TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30136
Applicant........... SRHI, LLC (Reilly Homes)
Location............ East of Madison Street, abutting both sides of Legends
Way and west of Mountain View within PGA West
Request ............. Subdivision of 18.94 acres into 62 single family and other
miscellaneous common lots.
Action ............... Resolution 2001-
PC/AGENDA
00
E. Item ................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-693
Applicant........... JR Properties for The 99C Stores
Location............ Northwest corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street,
adjacent to Home Depot in the Jefferson Plaza.
Request ............. Review of architectural and landscape plans for a
shopping center to include a 23,000 square foot
commercial store.
Action ............... Request to continue to May 22, 2001
F. Item ...................
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT #41,
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-078, ZONE
CHANGE 2001-101, SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E
AMENDMENT #5, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-
703, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30125
Applicant...........
KSL Land Development
Location............
The southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50
Request .............
1) Certification of an Addendum to an Environmental
Impact Report; 2) a General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change to change lands currently designated as Tourist
Commercial to Low Density Residential; 3) a Specific Plan
Amendment establishing development standards and
design guidelines for the construction of 65 single family
homes, a clubhouse, and amendment of the landscaping
plant palette; and 4) development plans for the model
homes; and subdivision of 17.82 acres into 65 single
family lots and miscellaneous lots.
Action ...............
Resolution 2001 , Resolution 2001- , Resolution
2000-_, Resolution 2001-, Resolution 2001
Resolution 2001
G. Item ...................
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-421, GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-073, SPECIFIC PLAN 84-004
AMENDMENT #4, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20469
AMENDMENT, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
AMENDMENTS TO 25154, 27835, 27840, 27952,
28343, 28640, 28912, 29043, 29283, AND 29457
Applicant...........
Watson and Watson Engineering and Forrest Haag, ASLA,
Incorporated
Location............
South of Avenue 48, north of Avenue 50, west of
Jefferson Street, and east of Washington Street within
Rancho La Quinta Country Club
Request .............
1) Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact; 2) General Plan Amendment to
modify Chapter 7, Policy 7-1 .4.3 of the Infrastructure and
Public Services Element to allow an exemption to the
undergrouding of utility lines that are attached to joint -use
92 KV transmission lines; 3) Amendment #4 to Specific
PC/AGENDA
UU3
Plan 84-004 to establish new guidelines and standards
for overhead utility lines, undergounding, and adding five
acres to the 718 acre master planned community of
1,300 residential units oriented around two 18-hole golf
courses; 4) a request to amend the Conditions of
Approval for Parcel Maps and Tract Maps to eliminate the
undergrounding of overhead utility lines on 92 KV
transmission lines and; and 5) amending Tract 29457 to
subdivide 283 acres into 265 residential and other
common lots.
Action ............... Resolution 2001-_, Resolution 2001- Resolution
2001- , Resolution 2000- , Resolution 2001-
Resolution 2001 , Resolution 2001- , Resolution
2001- , Resolution 2001- , Resolution 2001-
Resolution 2001- , Resolution 2001-, Resolution
2001-, Resolution 2001 -
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Item ................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-704 - THE ESTATES
Applicant........... Estates 18 LLC - Peter Bilicki
Location............ Along Peninsula Lane within PGA West
Request ............. Review of an 18 lot development of two prototypes with
three and two facade treatments, respectively, and
landscape design plans.
Action ............... Minute Motion 2001-
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioner discussion regarding City Council meeting of May 1, 2001.
X. ADJOURNMENT
PC/AGENDA
00Z
MEMORANDUM
TO: Community Development Department
FROM: Steve Speer
Senior Engineer
DATE: May 4, 2001
SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map No. 29457 (Amend #1) / Specific Plan 84-004 (Amend 44)
Rancho La Quinta
Requested Engineering Conditions
The Public Works Department requests that the following changes be incorporated into the
Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract 29457 (Amendment 41):
Existing Condition:
PROPERTY IRIGHTS
The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to Avenue 48 and,
' Jefferson Street except for the Jefferson Street entryway aligned with
Avenue 49.
To be modified to read:
PROPERTY I1IGHTS
UU1,74
The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to Avenue 48 and
Jefferson Street except for the Jefferson Street entryway aligned with
Avenue 49. Vacation of abutter's rights do not apply to CVWD for well -
sites.
D�LgCFF; ✓�F
In� MAY 0 ' 2001 D 'I
u� i
CiI) 0f LACUINTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
00
T^� 4 4Qu&rw
MEMORANDUM
TO: Community DevelPent Department
FROM: Steve Speer
Senior Engineer
DATE: May 8, 2001
SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map No. 29457 (Amend #1) / Specific Plan 84-004 (Amend #4)
Rancho La Quinta
Requested Engineering Conditions
The Public Works Department requests that the following modifications be made to the
Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract 29457 (Amendment #1).
GRADING
Maximum pad elevation for the following lots shall be:
Lot 259 47.9feet
45.6 feet
Lot 260 49. i
feet 46.4 feet
Lot 261 56.2
feet 47.1 feet
Lot 262 51.4-feet
48.0 feet
Lot 263 52.5feet
48.7 feet
Lot 264 53.0
feet 49.2 feet
Lot 265 53.8
feet 49.8 feet
00
(:0 L',_VCz
C S fJ
P�,_) 0
ACM
C CL
£s 0
April 18, 2001
Dear Neighbor,
APR 2 2001
CITY 0 LA pUINTA
CITY MANAGERRS' DEPT. ®�®
INDIAN. WELD
TENNII GARDEN
We want to give you notice we are holding a special event over the next 30 days at our facility.
This event is live entertainment and the information is as follows:
♦ Saturday, May 19': A concert with Los Lobos as the headliner and Maio, featuring Jorge
Santana, as the opening act. The concert will begin at 7:30pm with doors opening at 6:30pm.
Both bands are legends in the Latin entertainment world and Los Lobos will be receiving a
Lifetime Achievement Award from Billboard Magazine later this month.
We will not be using the stadium sports lights or stadium announcing system during these events.
The Riverside County Health Department will be monitoring the sound during the concert to assure
we do not exceed 65db at our property lines. The traffic for these events will be handled according
to our approved) traffic plan.
Tickets go on sale Friday, April 27`". For ticket information, please call the Indian Wells Tennis
Garden box office at 760-345-8499.
Yours truly,
Q60- (1�
Richard R. Oliphant
Project Manager
78 200 Miles Avenue
- Indian Wells. CA 92210
760 360 3346
Fax 760-772-3299
eox Office: 80U999-1585
007 0 -7 ""asters series.con,
U 11 �
Les & Jancie Wolf
49-98I Mission Drive West
La Quinta, CA 92253
May 7, 2001 M` -.-
(no
MAY -12001
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
To the Planning Commission
o FC UVE
MAY 0 72001'
CITY OF cAQUINTA
PLANNING DEPARTMEN'
RE: Amendment request by T.D. Development
As residents of Rancho La Quinta Country Club, we received a notice regarding the
request by the developers of our community. If we understand this request correctly, the
developer is asking for an amendment to allow the existence of the overhead power lines
surrounding our property.
If this is true, this is counter to what we were told by the developer when we purchased
our home. We were told the power lines surrounding the development would be placed
underground "in the near future". This was important to us as our home within 100 feet
of 50`s avenue, and much of our view is to the south. That view is somewhat spoiled by
the existence of the overhead power lines.
Therefore, we urge the planning commission to insist that these power lines be placed
underground, as originally promised. The developers current advertising slogan of
"more view, more new" is not in keeping with their request.to leave the power lines
above ground.
Thank you for considering our views on this matter.
Sincerely
Cl-
�5�
Les Wolf -
Janice Wolf
r /
V
MAY-08-2001 TUE 03:39 PM LA QU]NTA RESORT HOMES FAX NO. 7607774833 P. 02
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
0
\hay 8, 2001
ferry rlcrman
Conunuuity Development Director
City of La Quinta
7t1-405 Callc Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Re. Tentative Tract 30125
17ear Jerly:
Per our discussion earlier today, we have been unable to gain acceptable resolution of the
conditions of approval for the above referenced tract which is scheduled on the Planning
Connnission agenda this evening. 'Therefore, we would request a continuance of the item
to the b'1ay 22, 2001 Planning Commission agenda so that we may continue to work with
stafl'to develop acceptable conditions of approval. it is our understanding that if we gain
approval on that date that this continuance will not affect our City Councit hearing date
of .June 5, 2001.
Thank you and we look forward to continuing to work with staff in resolution of this
issue.
S Clhevis Hosea
Vic e President, Land Development
cc-. Lary lechliter
Cindy Zamorez
hottest l< Haag
Christine Di lorio
Chris Bergh
Chris Vogt
'rotn Genovese
55 92(1 PGA 1loulevard " l.a Quinta, CA 92253 • (760) 564-7166 • Fax (760) 564-7131 Ll
05-08-01 16:41 RECEIVED FROM:7507774833 P.02
FRiN : Center For Dio-Diversity, CA FAX NO
rla y. OT. 20111 J : 4511 F2
Center for B iolo9* Cal Diversity
Promtvg �d mvw?{g mdzgwd ,taw mid aWp" ooWe "Nm1AA�a
.md the Pwj,dawgb r ,", faticy, "&w, m/d vaermmmrtad /mv.
VIA FACSRyM E AND HAND DELIVERY
May 7, 2001
City of La Quinta Planning Conunission
c/o Christine Di Iorio, Acting Community Development Director
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1,504
La Quinta CA 92253
Re: Response to previous Commission meeting statements on Environmental Impact Report (94-
287) Addendum for "The Green" nroiect
Honorable Commissioners and Ms. Di lorio:
Thank you for this opportunity to provide additional comments on the Addendum to
Environmental Impact Report (94-287) for "The Green" development project in the City of La
Quinta. The purpose of this letter is to respond to statements made at the April 10, Planning
Commission heating by the Commission and Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez. TheCenteragain
requests that the Planning Commission deny certification of The Green EIR addendum, and that the
Commission request submission by the project applicant of a subsequent EIR addressing, new
information and changed circumstances regarding project impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep prior
to reconsideration. New information and changed circumstances reveal that the project will
significantly harm the endangered bighorn to an extent not known or considered during the course
of previous California Environmental Quality Act analysis.
Center response to Assistant City Attomey Ramirez comments
At the April 101 Commission meeting, Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez made several
comments regarding Center interest in The Green project and against the need for a subsequent or
supplemental EIR. The Center respectfully disagrees with these comments and responds as Ulows.
Tucson • Plioenix •,San Diego - Silver City • Berkeley • Portland - Shaw Island
3,udiem Cakbaria Office •P0 Bm 628 •s�,Ysab 1, CA- 82070
T. (160) 782,M44 • F. (76C� 7820301
www.lYdogaldive,siy..vg
05-07-01 15: 30 RECEIVED FROM: P'02
FROM : Center for Bio-Diversity, CH FAX NO.
May. 07 2001 03:46PM P7
Response torevious Plannin Commission meetingstatem nts on The Green project EIR
addendum
May 7, 2001
Page 2
First, Mr. Ramirez alleged that Center involvement in The Green project may be a punitive
response to the City of La Quinta's intervention in a Center lawsuit against the Bureau of Land
Management. This allegation is incorrect and unprofessional. The Center is involved in The Breen
project for no reason other than our mission to protect endangered species and our specific concern
over negative effects of the project on the endangered Peninsular bighorn sheep.
The Commission should also be aware that Mr. Ramirez mis-characterized our Bureau of
Land management lawsuit as an effort to close trails, including La Quinta's Boo Hoff Trail. In fact,
the purpose of the Center's BLM lawsuit was to compel the BLM to carry out a long neglected
proceduriil responsibility under the federal Endangered Species Act to ensure that all of its programs
throughout the California desert do not jeopardize any federally listed species, including the
Peninsular bighorn sheep. Please note that the BLM admitted its failure to carry out this
responsibility in response to our lawsuit.
Mr. Ramirez also asserts that points raised in the Center's previous letter of April 10
regarding; adequacy of the original EIR are time barred by Public Resource Code Section 21167.2.
This certainly is not the case, especially with respect to concerns over the old EIR which are also now
directly related to approval of the addendum. For example, the California Department of Fish and
Game expressed concern in 1995 that mitigation details were not contained in the draft EIR. and that
a detailed mitigation description for bighorn and other resources should therefore be presented in a
draft subsequent EIR subject to full public review. But this was never accomplished and, as a result,
the public and La Quinta decision makers never had an opportunity to review the adequacy of bighorn
and other resource mitigation before approval of the original EIR.
The project applicant and City's failure to disclose mitigation details is clearly relevant today
as the addendum proposes the same old vague mitigation measures for new proposed impacts to
bighorn — Some undisclosed amount of mitigation funding will be provided to the unfinished
Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan for some unspecified result, and a
vaguely conditioned habitat management plan will be prepared at some later date for some unspecified
result with no opportunity for public review and comment.
Mr. Ramirez also asserts that two legal decisions, Sierra Club vs Gilroy City Counci➢ (1990,
222Cal.App.3d30)and ChaparralGreensys City of ChulaVista(1996,50Cal.AppAth1134).show
that a subsequent EIR is not required for The Green project. This assertion is incorrect. The rational
of the Chaparral Greens and Gilroy decisions does not apply to the Green project.
05-07-01
RECEIVED FROM: P-93
1.i:31 p
FROM : Center for Eio-Diversita, CA FAX NO.
May. 07 2001 03:47PM F4
Response to Arevious Planning Commission meeting statements on The Green project EIR
addendum
May 7, 2001
Page 3
In ,he Gilroy case, new information regarding project effects on endangered species came to
light prior to certification of the project EIR (271 Cal. Rptr. 393, 395), not "years after" as
the court found that the new information had been
characterized by Mr. Ramirez: In Gilroy'
adequately addressed in the responses to comments on the EIR.
Chaparral Greens also involved disclosure of new information during public review and prior
to certification of the original EIR. 58 Cal. Rptr. 2nd 153, 159. The new information was considered
by the City of Chula Vista prior to certification of the EIR, so amendment of the EIR and re-
circulation was not required.
In contrast, significant new information has become available regarding the harmful effects
of The Green project on bighorn since approval of the 1995 EIR. While it may be true as asserted
by Mr. Ramirez that the 1995 EIR did address some significant impacts to bighorn, it could not have
seen into the future to consider significant new information which has become available since 1995
on the harmful effects of the project.
As stated in previous correspondence, and contrary to a statement by Mr. Ramirez, the Green
project area -Martinez Canyon bighorn ewe group has suffered a significant decline since 1995. This
ewe group lives in and around The Green project site. Bighorn in the Santa Rosa Mountains east of
Highway 74 declined by roughly 42% between 1996 and 1998, from 83 down to 48 sheep.' 2
Also, Peninsular bighorn sheep were listed as an endangered species by the federal
government in 1998, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's expert Peninsular bighorn sheep recovery
team identified "essential" bighorn habitat on The Green project site in 2000, and a major study was
completed by the Bighorn Institute showing harmful effects of urban development on Peninsular
bighorn. Unmentioned in our last letter but equally important as new information was the
identificati in 2000 of formal "critical habitat" by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service over a portion
of The Green proiect site, including the area to be disturbed for the new road. T}ns slgmficant new
information has never been considered by La Quinta decision makers or offered for public review,
and should now be in the form of a subsequent or supplemental EIR prior to approval of proposed
project modifications.
' U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Recovery plan for bighorn sheep in the Peninsular Ranges,
California.
James AeForge, Bighorn Institute, personal communication 2001
05-07-01 15:32
RECEIVED FROM: P.94
FROH : Center for Rio -Diversity, CR FAX NO.
May. 07 2001 O7:48P111 P5
Rea nse to previous Plannin Commission meeting statements on The Green project EIR
addendum
May 7, 2001
Page 4
Center response to Commissioner comments
At one point during the April le meeting, Chair Robbins raised the point that the term
"essential ]habitat" for the bighorn has no legal standing. The Commission should be aware, however,
that this term is grounded in Endangered Species Act definitions, is of significant biological
importance and affects how CEQA analysis and disclosure should unfold_
The term "essential habitat" was created by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's expert
Peninsular bighorn sheep recovery team to identify those areas believed to be essential for the survival
and ultimate recovery, or "conservation" of the species, and ultimately to assist in identifying the
more formal "critical habitat." The definition of "critical habitat" under the ESA is species' habitat
.. on which are found those physical or biological features ... essential to the conservation of the
species and ... which may require special management considerations or protection ..." The term
"conservation" means "...all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any (listed]
species to the point at which measures provided pursuant to [the Endangered Species Act] are no
longer necessary. According to CEQA standards, areas identified as essential habitat are just as
important as the Service's more formal critical habitat determination. Both should be considered
significant new information requiring a subsequent of supplemental EIR.
Chair Robbins also asserted that The Green property was not of concern to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. This should be viewed in light of the Service's expert recovery team's identification
of essential habitat over the entire project site, and the Service's designation of critical habitat over
a portions of the project site.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments. 1 will be available at the Pilanning
Conunission meeting this evening, or please contact me at 760 782-9244 if you have any questions
regarding these comments.
Sincerely,
'
David Hogan
cc: Curt. Taucher, Regional Manager, California Department of Fish and Game
RECEIVED FROM: P.05/
05-07-01 15:34 (11 3
LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING
HELD JOINTLY WITH
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 4, 2001
A special joint meeting of the La Quinta City Council and Planning Commission was
called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Mayor John Pena, who led the pledge of allegiance.
CITY COUNCIL ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Council Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor
Pena
ABSENT: None
PLANNING COMMISSION ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, Chairman Robbins
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC COMMENT - None
CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA - The agenda was confirmed by all present.
PRESENTATIONS
Steve Robbins, representing the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD),
introduced District Board Members Corky Larson and Peter Nelson. He then
delivered a power -point visual presentation outlining the various sources of
water utilized by CVWD. He discussed the declining water levels in the
Coachella Valley, stating an overdraft of 32,000 acre feet exists in the upper
valley and an overdraft of 104,000 acre feet exists in the lower valley.
Mr. Robbins discussed the components of the CVWD Water Management
Plan which were considered: 1.) No Project; 2.) Pumping restrictions; 3.)
Demand management; 4.) Ground water recharge; 5.) Source substitution
and finally a combination of the alternatives. He advised the elements
decided upon for the plan were water conservation measures, source
substitution and ground water recharge. In response to a question from
Commissioner Butler, Mr. Robbins said a large scale recharge plant is being
Minutes - CC/PC April 4, 2001 Page 1
014
planned for a federal site located south of Lake Cahuilla to recharge the
water tables in the lower valley.
Coachella Valley Water District Board Member Russ Kitahara arrived at 6:15
p.m.
Council Member Sniff stated he feels the recharged water needs to be
introduced in an area that roughly parallels Washington Avenue.
Mr. Robbins stated 800,000 acre feet of water is needed in the future. He
advised the Colorado River will yield 155,000 acre feet, a transfer from
MWD will yield 100,000 acre feet, and the rest will be provided by increased
re -cycled water use, additional purchases of water and desalting agricultural
drain water.
The Council and Commission discussed the problems which arise from over -
drafting and Mr. Robbins advised that the subsidence occurring in the valley,
at this point, is very minor and has only been taking place for about 4-5
years. He stressed that conservation will help take care of the current
overdraft problem but in order to recharge the ground water, all of the plan
needs to be implemented.
Commissioner Kirk asked what action the District took in the instance of the
water skiing lake project in Indio. Mr. Robbins replied the District requested
a ruling from the State Water Resources Board with regard to the
appropriateness of recreational use of such a large body of water in the
desert. He said that a ruling was not forth -coming and in light of that,
CVWD negotiated use of canal water for this recreational lake use.
In conclusion he advised the implementation of the plan elements is expected
to begin in 2002.
Council Member Adolph asked if the golf course communities are required to
tap into the canal water for landscape irrigation. Mr. Robbins responded they
use canal water for the golf courses only, not for the residential landscaping.
Council Member Adolph also questioned the depth of the wells. Mr. Robbins
responded the wells go 600 to 900 feet in La Quinta.
Commissioner Tyler asked the reasons for the unkempt condition of the
CVWD well sites and stated the ones in La Quinta are "eye sores". He
requested the CVWD Board take steps to improve the appearance and safety
conditions of their well sites.
Minutes - CC/PC April 4, 2001 Page 2
r
RECESS
Mayor Pena called a brief recess at 7:02 p.m.
JOINT STUDY SESSION
A joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission was adjourned
at 7:17 p.m. All members of the City Council were present and all members
of the Planning Commission were present.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
1 . DISCUSSION OF DRAFT MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND
DRAFT GENERAL PLAN POLICY DOCUMENT.
Community Development Director Jerry Herman introduced Nicole Criste of
Terra Nova Planning and Research, Inc., the City's consultant for the General
Plan and members of the Community Development staff in attendance. Ms.
Criste presented an overview of the General Plan process and advised that
the Housing Element will immediately follow the adoption of the General
Plan.
Members of the Council and Commission expressed concern about the size
of the planning area shown. Staff responded that the planning area is only a
method of looking at future development in areas adjoining the City and the
impacts they may have on La Quinta's infrastructure and environment. She
said the size of the area designated, in no way indicates the City's
annexation intentions.
Ms. Criste stated there are relatively few major changes to the Environmental
Assessment. She stressed the document has been streamlined and the Draft
General Plan has enlarged the planning area significantly.
Land Use Designations
Ms. Criste discussed the use of the agriculture overlay and the low density
designation. Council Member Henderson asked if there is an equestrian
overlay component in the plan. Community Development Director Jerry
Herman stated he will be addressing the meetings held with the equestrian
community residents at a later point in the meeting.
Minutes - CC/PC April 4, 2001
Page 3
Commissioner Tyler expressed the opinion that the size of the planning area
and the low density designation may be misunderstood by the residents of
the Vista Santa Rosa community. Council Member Adolph and
Commissioner Butler concurred.
Director Herman reported that meetings have been held with the Vista Santa
Rosa Community of Interest residents and he distributed an outline of a rural
equestrian (RE) land use designation for the Community of Interest area. The
permitted uses they desire are: minimum five acre lots; one primary unit per
5 acres; ten horses per acre; all related equestrian uses permitted per primary
residence; golf country clubs with interior multi -purpose trails; residential
developments with interior multi -purpose trails; and caretaker housing. They
also suggested a number of conditional uses for the area and streets be
limited to two lanes except Airport Boulevard, Monroe Street, Jackson Street
and Harrison Street. Mr. Herman stated he believes this area can be
addressed with an RE land use designation.
Chairman Robbins questioned why there can't be an agricultural land use
with a low density overlay. Ms. Criste responded that the land use
designation is used to determine traffic volumes for the transportation and
circulation plan and therefore the highest traffic generator should be the land
use.
Commissioner Kirk asked if there is anything in the law that would preclude
having a low density overlay with an agricultural designation. Ms. Criste said
she was not aware of anything in the law that precludes this type of plan but
strongly suggested that the map prepared be the one transmitted with the
EIR. She said alternatives can be addressed during the Public Hearing
process.
Council Member Henderson requested that the maps used for the public
hearings be prepared with colored acetate overlays. Commissioner Kirk
suggested a "power -point" presentation could also show the underlying maps
and show overlays of the other components such as the land use
designations, specific overlays, boundaries, etc.
Commercial Land Use Designations
Nicole Criste then outlined the commercial land use designations. On the
existing General Plan the land on the east side of Washington Street between
48th and 47th, is shown as Community Commercial (CC) and the suggested
change will be to Neighborhood Commercial (NC).
Minutes - CC/PC April 4, 2001
Page 4
01;
F
Mayor Pena asked if the map indicates the recent general plan amendments
such as the re -zoning for the Arnold Palmer Restaurant. Director Herman and
Ms. Criste confirmed that all of the most recent amendments to the general
plan need to be added to the map.
Chairman Robbins asked if the federally -owned property being considered by
CVWD for a recharge facility can be designated Major Community Facility
(MC) in the planning area.
Traffic and Circulation
The consultant, Ms. Criste reviewed the roadway classifications and the
multi -purpose trails. Council Member Perkins suggested that the sections of
Highway 111 that narrow down to two lanes in each direction, be looked at
for three lanes since Hwy. 1 1 1 carries a Major Arterial designation. Council
Member Sniff stated the City was assured that those sections could be
striped for three lanes (both directions) when necessary, without having to
acquire additional right-of-way.
Ms. Criste said the final major change to the roadway general plan is the
addition of the Phase 1 golf cart routes. Commissioner Tyler commented on
what he feels is a lack of adequate planned golf cart routes in the North East
section of the city.
Staff advised the schedule for future action is as follows:
Release of the Notice of Presentation 4-16-01
Release of the Environmental Impact Report 5-25-01
Start of the Public Hearings 7-17-01
Ms. Criste recommended the public hearings be conducted jointly by the
Council and Planning Commission. She stated this has worked out well in
other communities and cuts down the amount of time the public needs to
spend attending the hearings of both bodies. Council Member Henderson
proposed that only the first public hearing be a joint one to allow the Council
an ample opportunity to consider the comments of the Commission.
Questions and Comments
Council Member Henderson requested the language in the Administrative
Element of the draft reflect La Quinta's Charter City status.
Minutes - CC/PC April 4, 2001
Page 5
r`
Mayor Pena requested that Policy 2 on Page 7 include Tribal Councils.
Commissioner Kirk said he feels the use of Specific Plans should be reserved
for larger properties with one ownership and not used for single uses such as
a restaurant. Ms. Criste referred to Policy 4, Page 16 as the appropriate
place to make such a modification.
Mayor Pena questioned if Policy 4 and 4.1, Page 16 should address over-
flights. Commissioner Tyler felt this is in the purview of the FAA. Mayor
Pena also stated he the language, "target golf courses" contained in Program
3.3 on Page 16, should be rephrased.
Commissioner Kirk, in regard to Program 4.2, Page 16, questioned if the City
has ever allowed parks fee credits for golf courses. He felt this is an area
that should be researched.
Council Member Sniff commented he is still unconvinced that joint Council/
Commission public hearings are a good idea and that he would like to have
more time to review the comments made by the Planning Commission before
the Council addresses the matter. Commissioner Abels stated he feels, since
this is something that has worked successfully in other communities, he
would like to see the City of La Quinta try it.
Commissioner Tyler read a list of his concerns regarding the age of some of
the data being used in the General Plan document. He also objected to
references in the Traffic and Circulation element to Avenue 44, since the
name was changed to Fred Waring Drive some time ago. Ms. Criste
requested any corrections noted by the Council and Commission, be provided
to staff to insure the final draft incorporates them.
Commissioner Kirk related a concern that whenever an image corridor
approaches the Village he feels the Village design standards should be
imposed. He also addressed a "regional" need to construct a roadway parallel
to Highways 1 1 1 and 86 that would roughly follow the old Indian trail shown
on the Cultural Resources Map (Exhibit 9.1) He felt this is essential to the
traffic circulation element for the lower valley as a whole.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further discussion, it was moved by Council Member Sniff,
seconded by Council Member Henderson to adjourn the City Council meeting
at 9:02 p.m. The motion was unanimously carried.
Minutes - CC/PC April 4, 2001
Page 6
�, i o
It was moved by Commissioner Butler, seconded by Commissioner Tyler to
adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 9:03 p.m. The motion was
unanimously carried.
Respectfully submitted,
June S. Greek, CIVIC
City Clerk, City of La Quinta, California
Minutes - CC/PC April 4, 2001 Page 7
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
April 24, 2001
7:00 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Robbins who asked Commissioner Abels to lead the
flag salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Robert
Tyler, and Chairman Steve 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. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to reorganize
the Agenda by taking Business Item "A" before the Public Hearings.
Unanimously approved.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of
April 10, 2001. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 2, Item #2 be
corrected to read, "...turf was being requested by staff." and "...that had
not been resolved."; Page 3, Item #3 correct the word "enter" and change
"fifth" to "eleventh"; Page 6, Item #13 changed to read, "Quarry Road";
Page 7, Item #19 correct the spelling of "Corp" to "Corps"; and Page 20,
Item #42 delete as follows, "...approving the road be reopening...".
Chairman Robbins asked that Page 2, Item #3 be corrected to read,
"...appeared to be lower than..."; and Page 21, Item #48 "Mr. Bob
Mainiero asked if the...". There being no further corrections, it was
moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to approve the
minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved.
B. Department Report: None.
1 �l
G: \ W PDOCS\PC4-24-01 . wpd
r
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
V. PRESENTATIONS: None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Master Design Guidelines 2001-014; a request of James C. Belknap
Construction for review of development standards for the Cove
Residential area throughout the Cove.
1. Chairman Robbins asked for the staff report. Planning Manager
Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff.
3. There being no questions of staff nor any other discussion, it was
moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abets to adopt
Minute Motion 2001-009 approving Master Design Guidelines
2001-014, as recommended. Unanimously approved
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 2001-697; a request of RGC Courthomes, Inc.,
for review of architectural plans for two new prototype residential units
located at the northeast corner of Camino Quintana and Calle Mazatlan.
1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Kirk asked for clarification as to whether or not the
units were detached. Staff clarified they are attached.
3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Robbins asked
if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Hal
Lynch stated he was available for any questions.
4. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was any challenge to the small
courtyard. Mr. Lynch explained that since there is no open space
the plans were turned inward.
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-24-01 .wpd 2 U 2 1
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
5. Commissioner Butler asked if the HOA had approved the plans for
compatibility. Mr. Lynch stated they were present and it is his
understanding they have approved the plans.
6. Commissioner Tyler asked if this was the final buildout of Santa
Rosa Cove. Mr. Lynch stated to his knowledge there were no
otherlots.
7. There being no one else wishing to speak, Chairman Robbins
closed the public participation portion of the hearing.
8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Butler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-049 approving Site Development Permit 2001-
697, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners
Chairman Robbins.
ABSTAIN: None.
Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
B. Site Development Permit 2001-698; a request of Jerry Walker for review
of development plans for a Del Taco restaurant located at the northwest
corner of Washington Street and Highway 1 1 1 , within Point Happy
Commercial Center
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 Abels asked if this was across from the bank that
was located on the east side of Washington Street. Staff clarified
it was and they would be taking access at the new entry off
Washington Street. Commissioner Abels asked the location of the
bus stop. Staff identified the location.
3. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to identify the location of the metal
trellis recommended by the Architecture and Landscaping Review
Committee. Staff noted the location on the south elevation.
4. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Jerry Walker, representing Del Taco, stated he
concurs with staff's recommendation and was available for any
questions.
G:\WPD0CS\PC4-24-01 .wpd 3 11 Li 7
C e,
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
5. Chairman Robbins asked staff to clarify if there is now proposed,
or when the bike path is constructed, will there be a wall between
this project and the bike path. Staff stated there was no wall.
6. Commissioner Tyler asked if there was any perimeter wall. Staff
stated there would be a retaining wall and showed the location on
the elevations.
7. Commissioner Kirk stated he approved of the circulation pattern,
but found it difficult to review this project in relation to the entire
site. Does staff have any concerns. Staff stated it was in
agreement with the Specific Plan circulation pattern.
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 Ables/Butler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-050 recommending approval of Site Development
Permit 2001-698, as submitted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners
Chairman Robbins.
ABSTAIN: None.
Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
C. Tentative Tract Map 29053 Extension #1; a request of Lundin
Development Company for a one year extension of time for a tentative
tract map which creates 103 single family lots on 33 acres.
1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Kirk asked if any of the conditions had changed.
Staff stated only slight modifications.
3. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to confirm that no changes had
been made to the tract map. Staff stated that was correct.
4. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Mike Smith, Warner Engineering representing
the applicant, stated they had questions concerning Conditions
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-24-01 .wpd 4 0 2 3
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
#7.B. and #46.B.3 as the radius of the culs-de-sac should be 38.5
and 38 feet respectively. Senior Engineer Steve Speer concurred.
Mr. Smith stated they would also like to close the entry to the
north end of the commercial site that leads to the tract of homes
from Jefferson Street. It was a concern since the residential
homeowners' association would be responsible to maintain the
access and landscaping. Staff stated they were recommending
against it because it created a long dead-end driveway in the
center. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated staff has tried to keep
from forcing all traffic onto the Arterial street. If some of the
residential traffic can have direct access to the commercial site, it
would be better.
5. Commissioner Tyler asked if this site would be allowed a left turn
onto Jefferson Street. Staff stated this was a right turn in and out
and a left turn in movement only.
6. Commissioner Kirk stated he concurs with staff regarding not
closing the entry at the north end and asked if the developer could
work with staff to resolve this issue. Mr. Smith stated they would
take it under consideration.
7. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment.
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. Commissioner Kirk stated he sees no major issues and would
support the original conditions.
10. Commissioner Butler stated he still questions the access from the
residential to the commercial. Mr. Smith stated the residential
gate would be back far enough that those entering the commercial
would not be able to enter the residential.
11. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioner Kirk/Abets to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
2001-051 recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 29053,
Extension #1, as recommended by staff with modifications to
Conditions #7.B and 46.B.3. as discussed.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners
Chairman Robbins.
ABSTAIN: None.
Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
D. Site Development Permit 2001-696; a request of Lundin Development
Company, for review of development plans for a 74,080 square foot
commercial building located at northwest of the intersection of Jefferson
Street and 501h Avenue in Rancho Cielo Shopping Center.
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 Tyler asked the location of the drive through for the
pharmacy. Staff noted the location.
3. Commissioner Tyler asked if the other uses were part of the
Albertsons. Staff stated yes.
4. Commissioner Kirk asked what the north rear elevation would look
like for the residential development. Staff stated there was a ten
foot planter along the eight foot wall with some visibility to the
residents. There is also a retention basin behind the wall on the
residential side.
5. Commissioner Tyler stated there were no conditions about offsite
improvements. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that every time
you have in -line shops they are conditioned to comply with the
Specific Plan conditions so staff does not have to repeat the same
conditions as they are contained in the Specific Plan. Staff does
need to add a condition in regard to the timing of the construction
of the off -site improvements on Avenue 50.
6. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Robbins asked
if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Roger
Watts, representing Albertsons, stated there will be a wall at the
rear with landscaping and wrought iron so there is quite a lot of
layers between the center and the residential homes. In regard to
the off -site improvements, they have no issue with a condition
being added regarding the timing of those improvements. As
Albertsons owns Savon Drugs they will be included in the store as
well as Starbucks. The drive through however, is restricted to the
pharmacy only. The store will have a bank and will have the
variety of stock to compete with the other markets.
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-24-01.wpd 6 _
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
7. Commissioner Abels asked if there were other Savon Drug stores
that had a drive through. Mr. Watts stated he did not think so as
it was a new idea.
8. Commissioner Butler stated he has a problem with the perimeter
wall separating the residential. Mr. Smith clarified that behind the
market there is an eight foot wall and CVWD also has a wall
around the well site on the other side of the wall. Then there is a
retention basin and residential walls with wrought iron to separate
the two sites. Commissioner Butler asked what the landscaping
would look like. Mr. Smith stated there would be Acacia trees and
the tract map developer has no objection to the proposed
landscaping. Commissioner Butler questioned the lighting on the
rear of the building. Mr. Watts stated it is easy to direct and
screen the lighting and they would be willing to do that.
Discussion followed regarding the loading and unloading process.
9. Commissioner Tyler asked if the pharmacy would be open 24
hours. Mr. Watts stated the decision on the hours are usually
based on the area, traffic and competition. However, it would be
governed by the Specific Plan. Commissioner Tyler asked if they
saw the need for an external recycling center. Mr. Watt stated if
there was, it would not be by Albertsons.
10. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation
portion of the hearing.
1 1 . Commissioner Kirk commended the developer on the project and
noted this was the first project they had reviewed that did not
have any turf.
12. Commissioner Butler stated his initial concern was the rear
landscaping, but after the explanation, he is comfortable with the
design.
13. Chairman Robbins stated his concern was with the market's rear
elevations as well. He does believe it is better, but the building
still has no architectural detail and trees may or may not cover it.
Before he could support it he would have to see additional detail.
Discussion followed regarding the rear elevation. Staff stated they
had discussed this with the applicant and this is the result of those
discussions. Community Development Director Jerry Herman
stated the CVWD wall would block the loading area and there
G:\WPDO CS\PC4-24-01 .wpd 7
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
would be landscaping in the retention basin as well. In addition,
the commercial site will be built first and those buying the homes
will know it exists before purchasing. Also, the pad for Albertsons
is at 37 feet above sea level and the residential pads are at 41 feet
and the building is 28 feet high.
14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-052 approving Site Development Permit 2001-
696, as modified:
a. Add Condition to require applicant to work with staff to
increase the rear articulation of the market.
b. Add Condition that Avenue 50 improvements shall be
completed prior to final inspection of the first building.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners
Chairman Robbins.
ABSTAIN: None.
Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
E. Environmental Assessment 2001-414 General Plan Amendment 2001-
076 Zone Change 2001-099 Specific Plan 2001-053 and Tentative
Tract Map 30096; a request of Puerta Azul Partners, LLC for certification
of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; amend the
General Plan and Zoning Land Use designation from Tourist Commercial
to Medium Density Residential; review of development standards and
design guidelines for 127 resort villa units; and review of a tentative tract
map to subdivide 19.64 acres into 127 residential lots located at 57-325
Madison Street, north of Avenue 58.
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 was any discussion regarding any
two story units backing up to PGA West. Staff stated any two
story units would have the required setbacks.
3. Commissioner Abels asked where the two story units would be
located. Staff stated there were no two story units allowed next
to a single story less than 50 feet from the adjoining property line.
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-24-01.wpd 8
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
4. Commissioner Butler asked how many pools there would be. Staff
stated two were proposed.
5. Commissioner Tyler asked about the adjoining zoning. Staff stated
it was all Low Density Residential.
6. Commissioner Kirk stated he could not make sense of the phasing
plan. The Specific Plan states two phases and yet did not explain
them. Staff clarified there was no line distinguishing the two
phases. Commissioner Kirk stated his other concern was parking.
Staff stated they were required two parking spaces per unit and
the applicant was requesting 1.637 per unit. Commissioner Kirk
stated the Specific Plan states an average of one space per unit.
Staff stated one parking space per unit and one space for off site
parking. The applicant's proposal states that only one car per unit
would be needed and if a guest comes to visit, there is off -site
parking.
7. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Robbins asked
if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Mark
Rockwell, Pacific Land Management, the applicant, gave a
presentation of the project.
8. Commissioner Kirk asked about the phasing. Mr. Rockwell stated
all infrastructure would be completed first. The great house and
pool on the front end would be in the first phase. All streets and
homes would be constructed 12-16 at a time for the first phase.
9. Commissioner Tyler asked if all remnants of the Sculpture Park
would be removed. Mr. Rockwell stated there were a few pieces
that they would like to give to the community. They will be
keeping one on site. The house and all other structures will be
destroyed.
10. Commissioner Butler asked about the lake. Mr. Rockwell stated
there is a small pond that is very deteriorated and would be
removed.
11. Commissioner Abels stated this was a good and interesting
project.
12. Commissioner Tyler questioned the "Great House". Mr. Rockwell
explained the purpose and use.
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-24-01.wpd 9
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
13. Commissioner Kirk asked what the children would do. Mr.
Rockwell stated there are amenities in close proximity for children
as well as bicycle rentals and the pools.
14. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, the public participation portion of the hearing
was closed and open for Commission discussion.
15. Commissioner Kirk noted this was a good use of the specific plan
and the product was designed accordingly. His concern was in
respect to phasing and homes being constructed before the
amenities. Another concern is the large use of turf and perhaps
what they should do is limit the amount of turf outside the golf
amenities.
16. Commissioner Butler stated the comment was good, and perhaps
they could change the area around the residential units. Staff
stated it would be governed by the homeowners' association.
17. Commissioner Kirk stated he would recommend only a percentage
of turf be allowed.
18. Chairman Robbins stated he concurs with Commissioner Kirk and
also, the Specific Plan does not address any type of water
efficiency. He would prefer to give them flexibility, but require
less use of water. Mr. Rockwell stated they have a vested interest
in minimizing the turf themselves. They believe there will be key
areas for the turf, but also recognize that turf is high maintenance.
19. Chairman Robbins suggested that the use of turf be minimized
where possible and then use the Water Efficiency Formula with a
multiplying factor of .6.
20. Commissioner Kirk stated that until the Commission understands
the use of the Water Efficiency Ordinance he would rather use just
a simple percentage of turf to be allowed. Planning Manager
Christine di lorio suggested have the Specific Plan be modified
prior to submittal of a grading plan adding language regarding
water efficiency and minimizing the amount of turf. Discussion
followed regarding alternatives. Following discussion, it was
determined that language would be added to the conditions
requiring water conservation measures and using a .6 multiplier in
conjunction with the Water Efficiency Ordinance.
G:\WPDO CS\PC4-24-01 .wpd 10 023
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
21. Commissioner Tyler asked why this application could not be
processed under the Tourist Commercial ITC) zoning that is
currently there. Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated staff
would prefer not to because the TC designation does not allow for
residential. Staff has prepared a modification to the Tract Map
Condition #67. This would also be modified in Condition #65 of
the Specific Plan. Condition #1 of the Specific Plan and Tentative
Tract Map would also be modified.
22. Ms. Emily Hemphill, attorney for the applicant, stated that in
regard to the conditions, they would have no objection as long as
the 60 day time frame was per calendar year.
23. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-053 recommending certification of Environmental
Assessment 2001-414, as recommend.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
24. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to
adopt Planning Commissioner Resolution 2001-054 recommending
approval of General Plan Amendment 2001-076, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners
Chairman Robbins.
ABSTAIN: None.
Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
25. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-055 recommending
approval of Zone Change 2001-099, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.Change Desert Sands Unified School
District to Coachella Valley Unified School District.
26. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-056 recommending
approval of Specific Plan 2001-053, subject to the conditions as
amended.
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-24-01 .wpd 11
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
a. Condition #1: Add "The subdivider and his agents or
assignees also agree to defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless the City of La Quinta in defending any action
arising out of a challenge to the Conditions, Covenants and
Restrictions (CC&R's) discussed in Condition No. 65.
b. Condition #2:Change Desert Sands Unified School District
to Coachella Valley Unified School District.
C. Condition #41.A.: Delete (Madison Street)
d. Condition #50.B.: Delete the "Note".
e. Condition #63: At the end of the first sentence add "at the
west end."
f. Condition #65: The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions
(CC&R's) for the project shall include a provision which
states that the project is one intended for vacation use and
that any users or occupants of the unit, including owners,
shall not remain in the unit for a period that exceeds six
months of any calendar year. The CC&R's shall further
provide that when any owner is not in residency at his unit,
said owner may rent his unit, provided however, that said
owner shall be required to collect and pay to the City
Transient Occupancy Tax on all transient rentals in
accordance with the City's then existing Ordinances. The
CC&R's shall also include a provision that allows the City to
enforce the provision of the CC&R's (concurrently with the
homeowners' association) that contain the above
conditions. Further, the CC&R's also contain a provision
that precludes the CC&R's from being changed by any party
without the prior approval of the City. Prior to issuance of
the first building permit, applicant shall submit a copy of
final CC&R's to the City for compliance review of this
condition.
g. Condition #66: The final Specific Plan shall be modified
prior to issuance of a grading permit to include in the
concept landscape plan to minimize the use of turf where
possible and enhance water conservation. The Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance (Chapter 8.13) requirements
shall be applied with the modification substituting a factor
of .6 for .8 as an adjustment factor for the Annual
Maximum Applied Water Allowance (Chapter 8.13.030
B.2).
h. Condition #67: The final Specific Plan shall be modified
prior to issuance of a grading permit to define the proposed
Phasing Plan. Phase I shall include off -site and on -site
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-24-01 .wpd 12
031
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
utility and street improvements, recreational and other
amenities.
Condition #68: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the
final Conditions of Approval shall be incorporated in the final
Specific Plan document. Applicant shall work with staff to
correct internal document inconsistencies prior to final
publications of Specific Plan document. The final Specific
Plan shall be modified prior to issuance of a grading permit
to clarify the parking table on Page 25 of the Parking Study
(7.5)
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners
Chairman Robbins.
ABSTAIN: None.
Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
27. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-057 recommending
approval of Tentative Tract Map 30096, subject to the conditions
as modified:
a. Condition #1: Add "The subdivider and his agents or
assignees also agree to defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the City
of La Quinta in defending any action
arising out of a challenge to the
Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions
(CC&R's) discussed in Condition No.
65.
b. Condition #3: Change Desert Sands Unified School
District to Coachella Valley Unified
School District.
C. Condition #45.A.: Delete (Madison Street).
d. Condition #54.B.: Delete "Note"
e. Condition #66: At the end of the first sentence add "at
the west end."
f. Condition #67: The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions
(CC&R's) for the project shall include a provision which
states that the project is one intended for vacation use and
that any users or occupants of the unit, including owners,
shall not remain in the unit for a period that exceeds six
months of any calendar year. The CC&R's shall further
provide that when any owner is not in residency at his unit,
said owner may rent his unit, provided however, that said
owner shall be required to collect and pay to the City
Transient Occupancy Tax on all transient rentals in
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-24-01 .wpd 13
Planning Commission Minutes
April 24, 2001
X
accordance with the City's then existing Ordinances. The
CC&R's shall also include a provision that allows the City to
enforce the provision of the CC&R's (concurrently with the
homeowners' association) that contain the above
conditions. Further, the CC&R's also contain a provision
that precludes the CC&R's from being changed by any party
without the prior approval of the City. Prior to issuance of
the first building permit, applicant shall submit a copy of
final CC&R's to the City for compliance review of this
condition.
Condition #68: Phase I shall include off -site and on -site
utility and street improvements, recreational and other
amenities.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners
Chairman Robbins.
ABSTAIN: None.
Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Community Development Director notified Commissioners of the Country
Club of the Desert invitation.
B. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the City Council meeting of April 17,
2001.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Abels/Butler to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next
regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held May 8, 2001, at 7:00 p.m.
This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:39 p.m. on April 24,
2001.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
3
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-24-01.wpd 14 (1 0
PH AA
T4ht 4 4a Qum&
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND PLANNING COMMISSION
MEMBERS
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT�+
RE: ACCESS EASEMENT THROUGH THE QUARRY PROJECT FOR
SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 - AGIOTAGE LIMITED
DATE: MAY 8, 2001
On April 10, 2001, the Planning Commission, on a 5-0 vote, continued this case to
May 8 to allow the applicant additional time to determine if access through The Quarry
could be achieved for Parcel 3. Enclosed is legal correspondence from the applicant's
attorney.
Attachment: Letter dated 4/30/01 from James M. Schlecht
r1
5-8 PC Memo Green 49Greg/Page 1 J 01 3 Y
05/01/01 TUE 10:52 FAX 1 760 323 1758 S S & S
a(102
SCHLECHT,SHEVLIN &SHOENBERGER
A LAW CORPORATION
LAWYERS
LAMES M. SCHLECHT
IOHN C. SHEVLIN
ION A-sHOENBERGER
DANIEL T. JOHNSON
DAVID A. DARRIN
MARTINA KANO RAVICZ
DOUGLAS D. SANDERS
April 30, 2001
Christine Di Iorio
Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
801 EAST TAHQUrrz CANYON WAY, SUITE 100
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92262
MATT INTT ADDRESS
P. O. BOX 2744
PALM SPRINGS, CALFoRN1A 02263-2764
RE: GREEN PROPERTY, ALSO KNOWN AS THE AGIOTAGE LTD PROPERTY
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT #94-297INCLUDING
AN AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN #94-025
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N99-M7
PARCEL MAP 28617
Dear Ms. Di Iorio:
TELEPHONE (760) 320-7161
TELECOPIER (760) 323-1758
EMAII. 98ff1R v60ace11W-wM
OPCOUNSM
RICK M. STEIN
IN REPII._Y_R FE.R TO'
1
At the suggestion of our client's engineer, Robert Mainiero, I am enclosing herewith a copy, of
a letter dated April 17, 2001 sent to William Morrow, President of La Quinta Golf Properties, Inc.
in connection with our client's attempt over the last several years to reach a Reimbursement
Agreement in connection with the easement granted to our client across the Quarry property.
Attached to our letter is another letter dated November 19, 1998 addressed to Mr. Morrow along
with a then draft copy of the proposed FAsrn=t Use and Reimbursement Agreement. Neither my
client nor our office as its attorneys have ever received a response to our April 17, 2001 letter.
Our letter has not come back from the post office and we called Mr. Morrow's office in advance
to verify his current address.
If you have any questions, please give me a call.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Very truly yours,
M. SC14LECHT
¢c: Client
(/ Robert Maimero
035 u02
05-01-01 89:48 RECEIVED FROM:1 760 '323 1758 P.02
05i01L01 TITE 10:53 FAX 1 760 323 1759 S S & S
Z 003
SCHI.ECHT, SHEVUN & SHGENBERGER
A LAW CORPORATION
LAWYERS
(AMPS M. SC MECHr
JOHN C. SHEVON 801 EAST TAIIQUITZ CANYON WAY, SURE 100
JON A. SHOENMGER PALM SPRIGS, CALIPORNtA 92262
DANIEL T. JOHNSON MAT MG AnnRASS
DAVID A. DARRIN
KAR11NA KANG RAVICZ P. O. BOX 2744
DOUGLAS D. SANDMM PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92263-2744
April 17, 2001
William Morrow, President
La Quinta Golf Properties, Inc.
41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 214
Palm Desert, CA 92260
RE. EASEMENT USE AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
i
Dear Mr. Morrow:
TELEPHONE (760) 320-7161
TELBCOP9ER (760) 323-1758
P MAn. M1I&W051eLW.wm
OF WU,RIFI-
RICK M. STEIN
IN REPLY REFER To:
10262.1(c)
I understand at the last La Quinta Planning Commission meeting you represented to the
Commission that you had an offer on the Reimbursement Agreement outstanding to our office for
which you had not received a response. I have reviewed my file in great detail and 1 cannot find
anything to confirm that allegation.
What I do find is the last offer we made to you dated November 19, 1998, a copy of which I
enclose herewith. While we did have some discussion about that offer, I find nothing to indicate
you ever responded in writing which we had requested.
If you wish to negotiate further on this matter, would you please respond in writing to the enclosed
proposal.
Very truly yours,
M.SCHLECHT
JMS/ct
Enclosure
cc: John L. Green
Robert Mainiero
UO3
03S
RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758�
P-03
05/01;01 TUE 10:53 FAX 1 760 323 1758 S S & S C�a04
SCHLECHT, SHEVLIN & SHOENBERGER TELEPHONE �� 32an61
JAMBS M. SCHLECHT A LAw coRPORATION
JOHN C. SHEVLIN LAWYERS TELECOPIi'il (760) 323-1759
JON A. SHOENBLRGER 15-MA1L nYaw®gkm
DANIEL T. JOHNSON POSE OFFICE BOX 2144
DAVm A. DARAIN 80l EAST TAHQU= CANYON WAY, SURE 100 IN REPLY REFER TO-.
PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92261-2744
10262.1(C)
November 19, 1998
William Morrow, President YJA— ICBM
La Quinta Golf Properties Inc.
41-865 Boardwalk, Suite �04
Palm Desert, CA 92260
RE. EASEMENT USE AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
Dear Mr. Morrow:
Enclosed please find another draft of the proposed Easement Use and Reimbursement
Agreement. All of the changes on this draft from the previous one you reviewed are contained
on page 3. We did not change any other portion of the document.
The dollar amount contained in paragraphs 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 is higher because we have agreed
with your position that we should not take a deduction for credits we thought had been granted
to you by CVWD.
However, we still are makinga deduction for the added costs we would have to pay CVWD.
They have been very emphatic with our engineer on the point that your installation of your
facility does not avoid the added cost they proposed to charge us. Accordingly, we take the
position we are entitled to a credit for that estimated amount.
If you will recall, both you and Craig contended you had discussed this matter with CVWD but
they do not seem to agree.
I recognize you objected to paragraph 3.1.2. However the way it is phrased, it would only
apply if you hasub
ve other property which is divided anc then those lot owners actually use the
easement. If they do not use the easement, then 3.1.2 would not apply, if they do use it, then
we believe we should get appropriate credit in the form of a percentage reduction in our client's
obligation.
With respect to your objection to paragraph 6.4, we have given it due consideration but still feel
it is a most reasonable provision and must insist upon it remaining in the document.
I am sending a copy of both this letter and the enclosed Agreement to Craig Bryant.
We would appreciate an early response.
X�ryy truly yours,
'-JAMES M. SCH ECHT
JMS/ct/Enclosure
cc: John L. Green (with enclosure)
Craig Bryant (with enclosure)
bc: Jacque Becker
05-01-01 09:48
(with enclosure)
u04
RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758 P.04
05i01,,01 TUE 10:53 FAX 1 760 323 1758 S S & S li'005
RECORDING REQUESTED BY:
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
SCHLECHT, SHEVLIN & SHOENBERGER,
A Law Corporation (JMS)
801 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, #100
Palm Springs, California 92262
EASEMENT USE
AND
REDOURSEMENT AGREEMENT
This Reimbursement Agreement is made and entered into this day of
1998, by and between LA QUINTA GOLF PROPERTIES, INC., a California corporation (hereinafter
referred to as "LGP"), THE QUARRY AT LA QUINTA HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC.,
a California non-profit corporation, (the "Quarry"), and AGIOTAGE LTD., BVI, a British Virgin
Islands Company, DOHRS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Michigan Limited Partnership, JACQUE
C. BECKER, and EQUITY LAND RESOURCES, INC., an Oregon corporation (hereinafter
collectively referred to as "Green Party"), with reference to the following facts:
RECITALS:
A. LGP is the owner of that certain real property located in the City of La Quinta, • County
of Riverside, State of California, as more particularly described in hibit "A" attached hereto ("LGP
Property"),
B. The Green Party owns the real property described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto
("Green Property"), which is adjacent to the southern boundary of the LGP Property.
C. The Quarry owns private streets and improvements thereon described as Lots A through
H, inclusive of Tract #27728 (described in Article 7).
D. The LGP Property was subject to two public rights -of -way known as 58th Avenue and
Adams Street. Adams Street and 58th Avenue provided the only possible access to a portion of the
northwest quarter of the Green Property (this portion of the Green Property is referred to herein as
the "Landlocked Property"). The City required LGP to grant to the Green Party an access and utility
easement over the LGP Property for the benefit of the Landlocked Property, as a condition of approval
to LGP's subdivision map, and as a condition to the abandonment of the public rights of way described
above.
(3110262.1/A-Rcinkv WM5.Crl111998
033
05-01-01 09:49 RECEIVED FROM:l 769 323 175E P.05
05�01 01 TUE 10:54 FAY 1 760 323 1758 S S & S
0 006
E. LGP recorded an access and utility easement in favor of the Green Party on June 15,
1994, as instrument No. 244806, in the Official Records of Riverside County, a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhi i "C" (the "Easement"), That portion of the LGP Property encumbered by
the Easement shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Easement Area".
F. The parties now wish to enter into an agreement for the purpose of allocating the costs
of constructing and maintaining the street and utility improvements which will be shared by LOP, the
Green Property, and the Quarry and their respective successors in interest, and for the purpose of
addressing other issues relating to the construction .and maintenance of the easement improvements.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1. CONSTRUCTION OF EASEMENT
1.1 LGP has completed construction of the following improvements within the Easement
Area: street surfaces; street striping, signage, lighting, and landscaping; curb and gutter; storm water
drainage system; all utilities needed and adequately sized to service the LGP Property and the
Landlocked Property; and the entry gate and gate house at the main entrance to the LGP Property
(collectively, the "Easement Improvements"). The costs of constructing the Easement Improvements
shall hereafter be referred to as the "Construction Costs."
1.2 The Green Party shall reimburse LGP for a pro rata share of the Construction Costs.
The Green Party's pro rats share of Construction Costs shall be determined in accordance with Article
3, below.
1.3 The Green Party shall be solely responsible for the costs of hooldng up to the utilities
constructed in the Easement Area. The Green Party shall be permitted to construct its utility stubs on
the LGP Property within reasonable proximity to the northern boundary of the Landlocked Property.
If it becomes necessary to disturb the LOP Property to access the utilities, the Green Party shall
restore the LOP Property to its prior condition.
ARTICLE 2. REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE
The Quarry shall be responsible for maintaining and repairing the Easement Improvements to
the standards customary for a first class residential subdivision in the City of La Quinta. The costs
of maintaining and repairing the Easement Improvements are referred to herein as "Maintenance
Costs". Commencing on the first day of the month immediately following the date grading permits
are obtained for the Landlocked Property, the owner of the Landlocked Property shall be responsible
for paying a portion of the Maintenance Costs, together with a portion of the cost of maintaining
manned security at the main entrance gate ("Security Costs"). The formula for determining the share
of Maintenance Costs and Security Costs to be paid by the owner of the Landlocked Property is set
forth in Article 3 below.
0/10 AIA-R.imbu ..VJMS_ ,1111998 Z
uu6
05-01-01 09:49 RECEIVED FROM:1 7b0 323 1753 P•05
05,01; 01 TUE 10:54 FAX 1 760 323 1758 S S & S
Z007
ARTICLE 3. PROPORTIONATE SHARE — FORMULA AND PAYMENT
3A Construction Costs. The Green Party's proportionate share of Construction Costs shall
be determined, and shall be payable, as follows:
3.1.1 The total amount of Construction Costs to be shared by the parties in
accordance with this Article is $6,563,493 (the "Base Amount"). The Green Party shall
be responsible for a fraction of this Base Amount, the numerator of which is the
number of lots shown on a final tract map recorded against the Landlocked Property
("Green Party Final Tract Map"), and the denominator of which is the sum of 65, plus
the number of lots shown on the Green Party Final Tract Map which for the purpose
of having a minimum obligation the number shall not be less than four (4) even if the
Map has less lots. Said fraction is hereinafter referred to as the "Green Party Propor-
tionate Share". For example, if the Landlocked Property is subdivided into 10 lots, the
Green Party's Proportionate Share of Construction Costs shall be 10/75ths (rounded to
the nearest 1/100th of one percent) of the $6,563.493 Base Amount, or $974,914.
3.1.2 The Green Party's Proportionate Share shall be revised if LGP acquires
and subdivides additional property adjacent to the LGP Property and if the Easement
Improvements serve any portion of such property. In such ease, the number of
residential lots constructed on such additional property shall be added to the
denominator in calculating the Green Party's Proportionate Share. For example, if LGP
subdivides such additional property into 20 residential lots, the Green Party's
Proportionate Share will be 10/95ths (assuming the Landlocked Property contains 10
residential lots). In such case, if the Green Party has already paid for Construction
Costs when the recalculation is performed, the amount the Green Party previously
overpaid for Construction Costs shall be determined, and LGP shall immediately refund
such amount to the Green Party.
3.1.3 The amount determined by the above provisions shall be paid to LGP
concurrent with the first grading permit issued by the City of La Quinta for a dwelling
on the Green Property.
3.2 Maintenance and Security Costs. The Green Party's proportionate share of
Maintenance and Security Costs shall be determined, and shall be payable, as follows:
3.2.1 The country club known as the Quarry (the "Club") will be using some of the
Easement Improvements, including the street improvements and landscaping leading into the
LGP Property, the main entrance gate and the gate house. The Club shall be responsible for
paying 65 % of the Maintenance and Security Costs. The owner of the Landlocked Property
shall be responsible for the Green Party Proportionate Share of the balance of Maintenance
Costs. If LGP or its successor subdivides additional property which is to be served by any of
the Easement Improvements, the Green Party's Proportionate Share of Maintenance Costs shall
be adjusted in accordance with paragraph 3.1.2.
Oil 0267.11A-Reibun..MVIMS.Cr! { A 1 M
95-01-01 09:50
RECEIVED
FROM:1
760
323
1753
P.07
051011101 TTTE 10:55 FAX 1 760 323 1758 s S & s zoos
3.2.2 The Club shall be responsible for paying 65 % of the Security Costs. The owner
of the Landlocked Property shall be responsible for a fraction of the balance of Security Costs,
the numerator of which is the number of lots shown on the Green Party Final Tract Map, and
the denominator of which is the sum of 65, plus the number of lots shown on the Green Party
Final Tract Map. This fraction shall be revised in accordance with section 3.1.2 if LGP or its
successor acquires and subdivides additional property to be served by any portion of the
Easement Improvements.
3.23 The Green Party's obligation to pay Maintenance Costs and Security Costs shall
commence on the first day of the month immediately following the date grading permits are
obtained for the Landlocked Property. The owner of the Landlocked Property shall pay its
pro rata share of Maintenance Costs and Security Costs quarterly in advance (costs for the
calendar quarter in which the grading permits are obtained shall be prorated). Not less than
ninety (90) days before the commencement of each calendar year the Quarry shall give the
owner of the Landlocked Property a proposed budget for Maintenance Costs and Security Costs
for the following calendar year. The budget shall show what share of the Maintenance Costs
and Security Costs will be paid by the Club, and what share will be paid by the Quarry and
the Green Party or their successors. The owner of the Landlocked Property shall have forty-
five (45) days from its receipt of the proposed budget to notify the Quarry or its successor of
any objections thereto. If it has no objections, the owner of the Landlocked Property shall
begin making quarterly payments at the beginning of the calendar year. If the owner of the
Landlocked Property objects to any portion of the budget, it shall deposit the disputed portion
with a neutral third party (such as an escrow company) to hold until the dispute has been
resolved through litigation, or otherwise, and the undisputed amount shall be paid to the Quarry
or its successor.
3.2.4 An annual year-end accounting of all Maintenance Costs and Security Costs shall
be provided to the owner of the Landlocked Property within 30 days after the year end_ Any
overpayment shall be credited towards Maintenance Costs and Security Costs owing for the
calendar year in which the accounting is received. If the owner of the Landlocked Property
underpaid, any undisputed portion of such deficiency shall be paid to the Quarry or its
successor together with the next quarterly payment of Maintenance Costs and Security Costs,
and any disputed portion of the deficiency shall be deposited with a neutral third party unfit the
dispute is resolved.
ARTICLE 4. REAL ESTATE TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS
4.1 The obligation of the Quarry to pay real property taxes and assessments shall not be
affected by the grant of the Easement hereunder, and the Quarry shall remain so obligated to pay such
taxes and assessments, as if this Fasement had not been created.
ARTICLE 5. REMEDIES FOR DEFAULT
5.1 In any action or dispute arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be
entitled to reimbursement from the losing party for costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees,
incurred by the prevailing party in connection with such action or dispute.
OIIQ2b2.1/w.R®obursee+aJ7M9.Cf111 IM 4 n (j
05-01-01 09: 59 RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758 P.98
05'01'01 TLE 10:56 FAX 1 160 323 1758 S S & S
&09
5.2 In the event of any violation or threatened violation of any of the provisions of this
Agreement by any party, the non -defaulting party, or its successors or assigns, shall have the right to
apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for injunctive relief.
ARTICLE 6. SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST
6.1 Each and all of the foregoing covenants, conditions and grants of easements shall apply
to and bind each of the parties hereto and each and all of their respective heirs, successors, assigns,
grantees, tenants and subtenants.
6.2 All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and
constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable law, including, but not limited to,
Section 1468 of the Civil Code of the State of California.
6.3 This Agreement shall create privity of contract and estate with and among all transferees
of the Quarry Property and the Landlocked Property, or respective portions thereof, and their
respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns.
6.4 The Green Party shall not remain liable for Maintenance Costs following the transfer
of the Landlocked Property by the Green Parry.
A. Transfer of Entire Landlocked Property. If the Green Party transfers the entire
Landlocked Property, the transferee(s) shall be liable for all Maintenance Costs commencing
with the calendar quarter immediately following the quarter the transfer is effected, and the
Green Party's liability for Maintenance Costs shall terminate at that time.
B. Transfer of Individual Lots. If the Landlocked Property is subdivided into two or
more residential lots by the Green Party or a successor to the Green Party (collectively, the
"Subdivider"), the quarterly Maintenance Cost obligation shall be allocated to the subdivided
lots on a prorata basis. As each lot is sold, the Subdivider's liability for Maintenance Costs
for the lot sold will terminate commencing with the calendar quarter immediately following the
sale of the lot. At that time, the lot purchaser shall become solely responsible for the
Maintenance Costs for his lot, just as lot owners in a common interest subdivision are
responsible for maintenance assessments accruing against their respective lots. There shall be
no cross liability between lots or lot owners, i.e. if one lot owner fails to pay his share of
Maintenance Costs, the Quarry Party and its successors shall not be entitled to take any
remedial action against other non -defaulting lots or lot owners. However, the Quarry Party
shall have the right to record a notice of lien on the defaulting lot owner.
ARTICLE 7. FULL USE OF EASEMENT
7A The Green Party and its transferees, assignees and successors in interest shall at all
times have the same right of use of the easement improvements, including, but not limited to, the
guard gate and other security arrangements as the owners of lots in Tract #27729, Map Book 249,
Pages 1 through 13, inclusive, office of the Riverside County Recorder.
o110262.1/A-aeimbry wUiMs Crn It99s
s
UU�
05-01-01 09:51
RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758
P-09
05.01i01 TUE 10:56 FAX 1 760 323 1758 S S d S 0olu
ARTICLE 8. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
8.1 The caption heading the various sections of this Agreement are for convenience and
identification only and shall not be deemed to limit or define the contents of its respective section.
8.2 All notices or other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing,
and shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, and shall be deemed received
upon personal delivery or eight (8) business days after deposit in the mail in Riverside County, postage
prepaid, addressed to the person to receive such notice at the following addresses:
LGP: La Quinta Golf Properties, Inc.
c/o Craig Bryant
Winchester Asset Management
41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 101
Palm Desert, California 92260
With a copy to: La Quinta Golf Properties, Inc.
c/o William Morrow
41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 204
Palm Desert, California 92260
Green Party: John L_ Green
'Oberseeweg 40
8853 Lachen SZ
Switzerland
With a Copy To: Schlecht, Shevhn & Shoenberger,
A Law Corporation (JMS)
801 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, #100
P. O. Box 2744
Palm Springs, California 92263
ATTENTION: James M. Schlecht, Esq.
The Quarry: Quarry HOA
c/o William Morrow
41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 204
Palm Desert, CA 92260
8.3 In the event a request is made to the parties hereto by any lender or beneficiary under
any proposed or existing mortgage or deed of trust encumbering portions of the LGP Property or the
Green Property for such further documents as may reasonably be required to carry out the intent of
this Agreement, consent thereto shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed by any party hereto.
011e262.IlA-Reu..burermrntllM3.C1'J111998 6 ` 1 1'
C'43 V
05-01-01 09:52 RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1755 F-10
05%O1. 01 TUE 10:57 FAX 1 760 323 1758 S S & S Z011
The party not benefitted by such a request shall be at no expense in this regard and will be acting as
an accommodation. It is the intent of both LOP and the Green parry that all liens of record against
the LGP Property shall be subordinate to this Easement at the time the Easement was recorded.
8.4 The parties hereto agree, from time to time, to execute such further documents as may
reasonably be required by any reputable title company to carry out the intent of this Agreement or for
purposes of obtaining title insurance on the Easement.
8.5 This instrument contains the entire agreement of the parties relating to the rights granted
and obligations assumed in this instrument, and supersedes any and all other agreements, contracts,
or understandings between the parties. Any oral representations or modifications concerning this
instrument shall be of no force or effect unless contained in a subsequent written modification signed
by the party to be charged.
8.6 Each party shall exercise good faith and fair dealing in connection with attempting to
effectuate the intents and purposes of this Agreement.
8.7 This Agreement is executed and intended to be performed in the State of California, and
the laws of that State shall govern its interpretation and effect.
8.8 This Easement shall terminate only in the event the northwest quarter to the Green
Property is entirely dedicated as open space and conveyed to a public agency.
8.9 All exhibits which are referred to in, and attached to, this Agreement, are hereby
incorporated into this Agreement in full.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by the parties hereto the day and year
first above written.
AGIOTAGE LTD., A British LA QUINTA GOLF PROPERTIES, INC.,
Virgin Islands Company A California Corporation
0
JOHN L. GREEN,
Its Designated Agent
DOHRS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
A Michigan Limited Partnership
MARY ELLEN DORHS,
General Partner
IACQUE C. BECKER
(1110262.11A-RnWMrec01e.UJW VVI11998
u
05-01-01 09:52 RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758
°- 04
P�11
05/01,01 TUE 10:57 FAX 1 760 523 1758
sS&S
U 012
Q
EQUITY LAND RESOURCES, INC., THE QUARRY AT LA QUINTA HOMEOWNER'S
An Oregon Corporation ASSOCIATION, INC_, A California Non -Profit
Corporation
Its
0/IOM2-I/A-Mmbm t/JM3.Crl R 1999
°a
8
u12
05-01-01 09:52
RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758 }J
045
P.12
05 0 1/ 01 TUE 10:57 FAX 1 760 323 1758 S S & S
4013
STATE OF )
ss.
COUNTY OF )
On this _ day of , 1998, before me, , the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared
and of LA QUINTA GOLF PROPERTIES, INC., a California
corporation, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the
persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that they
executed the same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the
persons or the entity upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
NOTARY PUBLIC
STAVE OF )
ss.
COUNTY OF )
On this _ day of , 1998, before me, , the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared
and , of EQUTTY LAND RESOURCES, INC., an Oregon corporation,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persons
whose names are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed the
same in their authorized capacities, and that by their signatures on the instrument the persons or the
entity upon behalf of which the persons acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
NOTARY PUBLIC
U 1.3
O110262.1/A.RojMb m mdJM5dS1111998 9 ,1 (i -/± U
05-01-01 09:53 RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758 P•13
05;01,'01 TOE 10:57 FAX 1 760 323 1758 S S & S 1�11J 14
i
STATE OF )
ss.
COUNTY OF )
On this _ day of , 1998, before me, , the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared MARY ELLEN DOHRS,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose
name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in
her authorized capacity and that by her signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf
of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal_
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
On this _ day of , 1998, before me, , the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared JOHN L_ GREEN, personally
known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is
subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his
authorized capacity and that by his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf
of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal_
NOTARY PUBLIC
U14
O110261. UA-Rc"h..® OMS. C171 11998 10
1
05-01-01 09: 53 RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758 P.14
05'01:111 TUE 10:58 FAX 1 760 727 1758 S S & S f�'J015
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF RNERSIDE )
On this _ day of , 1998, before me, , the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared JACQUE C. BECKER,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose
name is subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his
authorized capacity and that by his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon behalf
of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official W.
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF )
ss.
COUNTY OF )
On this _ day of , 1998, before me, the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared
and of THE QUARRY AT LA QUINTA HOMEOWNER'S
ASSOCIATION, INC., a California non-profit corporation, personally known to me (or proved to me
on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within
instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacities, and
that by their signatures on the instrument the persons or the entity upon behalf of which the persons
acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
GAM62-1/A-Ke bw t/]W.Cf/l IM
NOTARY PUBLIC
11
RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758
U1J
04 s
05-01-91 09:53
P-15
05;O1,01 TUE 10:58 FAX 1 760 323 1758 S s &I s
SCHEDULE OF EXHIBITS TO
EASEMENT GRANT
EXHIBIT A. Legal description of real property located in Riverside County, owned by La Quinta
Golf Properties, Inc.
EXHIBIT B: Legal description of real property owned by the Green Party which is located south of
the real property described in EXHIBTr A.
EXHIBIT C: Fasement.
U16
0110252.1/A-Rt®6uoemtuUJid8.4�1'/111998 12 "
05-01-01 09:53 RECEIVED FROM:1 760 323 1758 P-16
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 8, 2001 (CONT. FROM 4-10-01)
CASE NUMBERS: EIR ADDENDUM (EA 94-287; STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
#94112047), SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 (AMENDMENT #1),
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-047 AND TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 28617
REQUESTS: 1. TO CERTIFY AN EIR ADDENDUM FOR THE GREEN
SPECIFIC PLAN (SP 94-025) ALLOWING A NEW ACCESS
ROAD FOR AN APPROVED MASTER PLANNED
RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY OF 277 HOUSES; AND
2. TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A PRIVATE ROAD ON A
HILLSIDE SLOPE EXCEEDING 20 PERCENT; AND
3. TO AMEND THE GREEN SPECIFIC PLAN ALLOWING A
3,000 FOOT LONG PRIVATE ACCESS ROAD ALONG THE
NORTH SIDE OF A 330.70 ACRE PROPERTY TO SERVE
TEN CUSTOM LOTS; AND
4. TO ALLOW A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBDIVIDING
330.70 ACRES INTO FOUR PARCELS AND OTHER
LETTERED STREET LOTS.
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY OWNER: AGIOTAGE LIMITED
REPRESENTATIVES: MAINIERO, SMITH AND ASSOCIATES
LOCATION: BISECTED BY FUTURE JEFFERSON STREET,
APPROXIMATELY Yz MILE SOUTH OF AVENUE 58
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED GREEN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EA 94-287; STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 94112047) HAS BEEN
PREPARED PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT, SECTION 15164 (A, C, D, AND E). NO
CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS EXIST AND
NO NEW INFORMATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED WHICH
WOULD REQUIRE THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT
v 17
pc rpt sp25#1, 48 Greg - Page I
EIR PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION
21166.
EXISTING
GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE
DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE) AND OPEN SPACE
EXISTING
ZONING
DESIGNATION: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL), OPEN SPACE (OS) AND
HILLSIDE CONSERVATION
SURROUNDING
LAND USE: THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE VACANT EXCEPT
FOR THE EXISTING QUARRY DEVELOPMENT TO THE
NORTH
BACKGROUND:
Previous Planning Commission Meetings
Due to hydrology issues with this project, the City's Public Works Department
requested a one month continuance at the October 24, 2000 Public Hearing. The
Planning Commission, on a 4-0 vote, continued the case to November 28, 2000. On
November 28, no action was taken by the Commission due to the application being
withdrawn. The applicant has since resubmitted the applications for approval.
On April 10, 2001, the Planning Commission, on a 5-0 vote, continued this case to
May 8 to allow the applicant additional time to determine if access through The Quarry
could be achieved for Parcel 3 (Attachment 1).
Project History
On June 6, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution 95-37, approving design
guidelines and development standards for a master planned development of 277
housing units on approximately 331 acres to the south of The Quarry development in
conjunction with certification of an Environmental Impact Report (Attachments 2 and
3).
The adopted Specific Plan for this community outlines its long term development
pattern for this residential project and conservation of hillside areas and
equestrian/hiking trails. Mountainous areas account for approximately 231 .2 acres (70
percent) of the Plan's area. The gross project density is less than one unit per acre.
U13
pc rpt sp25#1, 48 Greg - Page �rq
Three types of residential lots are permitted: 1) Cove lots of 8,000 square feet or
more, 2) Estate lots of 10,000 square feet or more, and 3) Custom lots of 30,000 feet
or more.
Access to the site is planned by the extension of Jefferson Street south from Avenue
58 as required by the alignment plan approved under General Plan Amendment 95-048
in 1995 under Resolution 95-41 . Street and other infrastructure improvements are
required for this project as subdivision maps are processed. This planned community
also has ten custom lots at the northwest corner of the Specific Plan which take
access from private streets located in The Quarry development.
On April 16, 1999, the Planning Commission approved a time extension and minor text
changes for the Specific Plan by adoption of Resolution 99-026, pursuant to
Conditions #6 and #7 of City Council Resolution 95-37.
Project Request
Conditional Use Permit - The applicant is requesting development of a private
road into the area with the ten custom home lots with adjacent hillside slopes
of greater than 20 percent. A portion of the road, approximately 1,600 feet
long, will be located above the 20% slope. The proposed vertical incline of the
private road in this hillside area does not exceed 14.8 percent. The road will
negate the need to have access through The Quarry.
2. Specific Plan Amendment - The existing Specific Plan allows 277 dwelling units
on approximately 331 acres. This Amendment request does not alter the land
use plan, or propose residential development in the hillside areas. The principal
modification in the Plan is a request to change the original approved access to
the 10 lots in Parcel 3 from The Quarry to the north. Access is now proposed
by redirection of a private street from Jefferson Street along portions the north
side of Parcels 2 and 4 (Lot "B" of TPM 28617), a distance of approximately
3,000 feet. This two-lane roadway (28' curb to curb with no parking) has six
foot wide pedestrian pathways constructed using decomposed granite. A
double box culvert is proposed where the road crosses a natural watershed
channel similar in design to The Quarry development.
The applicant has with this amendment updated the document with text
changes that are highlighted in accordance with the time extension approved by
the Planning Commission in 1999.
3. Tentative Parcel Mao - The applicant proposes three large residential parcels,
one open space parcel (211.51 acres) and two lettered lots on approximately
331 acres. Primary project access is planned via the extension of Jefferson
Street (Lot "A") and development of Lot "B" for Parcel 3 (See Attachment #4
dated April 5, 2001).
U19
pc rpt sp25#1, 48 Greg - Page ��
Public Notice: This case was advertised in the Desert Sun on October 13, 2000, and
readvertised for this meeting on March 20, 2001. All property owners within 500 feet
of the boundaries of the project were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice
(Attachment 5). A minimum 20 day review period was established for this meeting
pursuant to discussions with the Department of Fish and Game.
Public Agency Review: The request was sent out for comments to City Departments
and affected public agencies on September 29, 2000. Agency comments received
have been made a part of the Conditions of Approval.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
The private alternative access road along the north boundary of the property shall
conform to the alignment diagrams in the Specific Plan document. Findings to approve
this request per Sections 9.210.020 (Conditional Use Permit) and 9.240.010 (Specific
Plan) of the Zoning Code and Section 13.12.130 of the Subdivision Ordinance can be
made and are contained in the attached Resolutions.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council certification of an Addendum to the Green Environmental Impact Report
(EA 94-287, State Clearinghouse #94112047) for Specific Plan 94-025
(Amendment #1), Conditional Use Permit 99-047 and Tentative Parcel Map
28617; and
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Conditional Use Permit 99-047, subject to findings and the
attached conditions; and
3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001- , recommending to the City
Council approval of Specific Plan 94-025 (Amendment #1), subject to findings
and the attached conditions; and
4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001- , recommending to the City
Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map 28617, subject to findings and the
attached conditions.
Attachments:
1 . Planning Commission Minutes of April 10, 2001
2. Approved Specific Plan Map
3. New Specific Plan Map
4. Parcel Map Reduction dated April 5, 2001
5. April 10, 2001 Letter from David Hogan
6. Large Parcel Map Exhibit (Commissioners only)
pc rpt sp25#1 , 48 Greg - Page 4 4 - 053 U 2 C
Submitted by:
r
Christine di lorio, PlannirYa Manager
pc rpt sp25#1, 48 Greg - Page 5 o 5 `,, U ti _
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT 94-287 PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN
94-025 (AMENDMENT #1), CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
99-047, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28617
CASE NO: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 94-287
APPLICANT: AGIOTAGE LIMITED
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 24" day of October, 2000, 10`h day of April, 2001, and 8`h day of May,
2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearings to consider an Addendum to Environmental
Impact Report #94112047 (EA 94-287), as prepared for Specific Plan 94-025
(Amendment #1), Conditional Use Permit 99-047, and Tentative Parcel Map 28617;
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 Impact Report
94-287 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164; and
WHEREAS, the Revised Project does not call for the preparation of a
subsequent EIR 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 EIR 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 EIR 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 EIR substantially increase the severity
of previously identified impacts.
WHEREAS, on June 6, 1995, the La Quinta City Council certified the EIR
(State Clearing House No. 94112047) for Specific Plan 94-025 encompassing 331 +
acres and allowing 277 single family residential houses bordering open space, hillside
areas.
WHEREAS, the revised project is a minor technical addition, which will
include redirecting a street from Jefferson Street along the northern portions of Parcel
AAResoPC EA SPGreen.wpd - 44 Greg T. I _ 0515 1121
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Environmental Assessment 94-287
May 8, 2001
Page 2
2 and 4. The private street will be approximately 3,000 lineal feet with a right of way
width of 50 feet. However, only 1,600 lineal feet will cross through Parcel 4 where
there was previously no disturbance. The purpose for this modification is to gain
access to 10 lots in the northwest portion of the property.
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments,
if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did
recommend the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify a recommendation to
certify said Addendum:
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment and related applications 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 were conducted in 1994 for the project,
subject to mitigation alternatives.
2. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment and related applications will not have
the potential to achieve short term goals.
3. The proposed Specific Plan 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 Specific Plan for which a
Final EIR has been certified.
4. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment and related applications will not have
environmental effects that will adversely affect humans, either directly or
indirectly, as the project contemplates single family residences, private roads
and other related infrastructure improvements previously addressed in the
certified Environmental Impact Report.
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 Impact Report
#94112047 (EA 94-287).
A:\ResoPC EA SPGreen.wpd - 44 Greg T. U
r� �,
2. That it does hereby recommend certification of the Addendum to Environmental
Assessment 94-287 for the above -cite projects.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 81h day of May, 2001, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
A:\ResoPC EA SPGreen.wpd - 44 Greg T.
u24
H �l!�yLL
APR - 5 2001
DRAFTADDENDUM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR
Green Specific Plan
Addendum to the Certified E/R
SCH# 94112047
Prepared For
City of La Quinta
78-495 Cale Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Contact., Ms. Christine Di lorio
Prepared By:
SFC Consultants
26012 Marguerite Parkway, Suite H424
Mission Viejo, CA 92692
Contact: Ms. Saundra F. Jacobs, REA
(949) 348-1233
March 19, 2001
26012 Marguerite Parkway, Suite H424, Mission Viejo, CA 92692
Toll free: (888) 212-1558 Telephone: (949) 348-1233 Fax: (949) 348-1433 Email: sjacobs@sfcconsultants.com r� r
U�.J
4 U j `�
J
Table of Contents
ITEM PAGE
Introduction 3
Role of the Addendum EIR 3
Decision to prepare an Addendum EIR 3
Background 4
Project Description 4
Approved EIR Project Description 4
Addendum Project Description 4
Findings and Facts
6
Land Use
6
Traffic and Circulation
6
Noise
7
Air Quality
8
Water Resources
9
Soils/Geology/Seismic
9
Hydrology
9
Biology
10
Aesthetics/Visual
13
Cultural Resources
13
Recreation
13
Population, Housing and Employment
14
Risk of Upset
14
Public Services and Utilities
15
Regional Location Map 16
Local Vicinity Map 17
Site Plan 18
2 .� U50 u26
Introduction
Role of the Addendum EIR
SFC Consultants (SFC) understands that the City of La Quinta, in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended 1999, requires that an Addendum Environmental
Impact Report (AEIR) be prepared for minor additions or clarifications to the Final EIR for the
Travertine and Green Specific Plans (SCH# 94112047), certified as adequate on June 6, 1995,
Regional, Local and Site Plan Exhibits have been attached to this Addendum EIR.
Modifications are proposed to Parcel 3 of the Green Specific Plan by redirecting a private street
from within Parcel 2 of the Green property, in order to gain access to ten lots in the northwest
portion of the site (Parcel S). A total of 1.8 acres, out of the 211.51 acres within Parcel$, will be
disturbed. The private street is proposed to be extended from the northern most of three potential
entry points along Jefferson (However, no tentative tract maps or internal design layouts have been
approved by the City), The private street will approximately 3,000 lineal feet from Jefferson Street
to the boundary of the ten lots with a right-of-way width of 50-feet. However, only 1,600 lineal feet
(1.8 acres) will cross through Parcel were there was previously no disturbance. Refer to the
project description on Page 5 for this Addendum for a detailed discussion.
The private street addition is proposed within the boundary of the Green Specific Plan area and will
require the following land use approvals:
An amendment to the Circulation Plan within the Green Specific Plan is required because
the original access to the 10 lots in Parcel was proposed from The Quarry developed to
the north. Access is now proposed from one of the three potential access points along
Jefferson Street within Parcel 2 (medium and low density land use), through Parcel
(open space/recreation), to gain access to Parcel3 (very low density land use).
A Conditional Use Permit is required to allow the private street to cross the hillside within
Parcel 3, per Zoning Code Section 9.1.40.040.
A parcel map for the subdivision of property is required in order to separate the open
space area (Parcel from developable areas (Parcels 1, 2 and 4). The private street is
proposed as an easement from Jefferson Street to Parcelg. The road will facilitate the
future development of Parcel.
No land use designations are proposed to change with the Addendum EIR.
The AEIR is the appropriate CEQA document based on CEQA Article 11, Section 15164(a, c, d, e),
Addendum to an EIR. These CEQA sections state the following:
Section 15164(a)
The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously
certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions
described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.
Section 15164(c)
An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached
to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
Section 15146(d)
The decision -making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or
adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.
Section 15164(e)
A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to
Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's
findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be
supported by substantial evidence.
Decision to prepare an Addendum EIR (Section 15164(e))
Pursuant to Section 15162, a brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR has
been included in this Addendum EIR for inclusion with the City's findings on the project.
Section 15162(a)(1) — Substantial changes are not proposed and will not require major
revisions to the previous EIR.
The modification to Parcel 3 of the Green Specific Plan is a minor technical addition, as described
by CEQA Section 15161(a)(1), which will include redirecting a private street from within Parcel 2,
through the northem portion of Parcel$. The purpose for this modification is to gain access to ten
lots in the northwest portion of the Green property (Parce11j). The Facts and Findings outlined in
this Addendum EIR are based on review of the previously approved Draft EIR and Technical
Appendices, and Volumes I and II of the Final EIR. Volume I of the Final EIR contains the
Comments and Response to Comments on the Draft EIR after public circulation. Volume II of the
Final EIR contains the Mitigation Monitoring Program. No significant new environmental impacts,
not previously addressed, are anticipated. Previous reports are applicable to the Green Specific
Plan, as proposed to be revised. The previously approved Mitigation Monitoring Program remains
applicable and enforceable.
Background
The Travertine and Green Specific Plans were both certified as adequate by the La Quinta City
Council on June 6, 1995, The Green Specific Plan development provides design guidelines and
development standards for 277 housing units on approximately 331 acres. Approximately 231
acres are above the toe of slope and have been reserved as open space. Access to ten lots in the
northwest portion of the Green Property was originally proposed as an extension from The Quarry
residential and golf course development to the north of the site. Subsequent to approval in 1995,
access from The Quarry has been changed to the proposed private street.
The Keith Companies (TKC) previously prepared the Draft and Final EIRs for the Travertine and
Green Specific Plans in March 1995. The Draft and Final EIR studied the impacts associated with
development of the Green and Travertine properties. Mitigation measures were outlined within a
Mitigation Monitoring Program with regard to mitigating impacts to less than significant levels. In
some cases, mitigation measures only mitigated impacts to the extent feasible. These impacts
were approved by the La Quinta City Council with overriding considerations. The private street
addition neither adds to existing impacts nor requires additional mitigation measures, which may
necessitate re -circulation of the document.
Proiect Description
Approved Green Specific Plan EIR Project Description
The Green Specific Plan project description included design guidelines and development standards
for 277 housing units on approximately 331 acres. Approximately 231 acres are above the toe of
slope and have been reserved as open space. The gross project density would be less than 1 unit
per acre. The three product types approved for the Green Specific Plan are as follows: 1) Cove
lots (medium density) with a minimum 8,000 square foot lot size, are located on the eastern portion
of the site; 2) Estate lots (low density) and Cove lots on 10,000 square foot minimum lots, with a
buffer on the open space areas on the west; and 3) Custom lots (very low density) located at the
northwestern comer of the project site adjacent to The Quarry development, which consists of
30,000 square foot lots.
Project access would be provided via three entry points off of the proposed Jefferson Street
alignment. Access to the ten custom lots in the northwest portion of the Green Property was
originally proposed as an extension from The Quarry residential and golf course development to
the north of the site. Subsequent to approval in 1995, and as discussed below in the Addendum
Project Description, access from The Quarry has been changed to the proposed private street.
Addendum Project Description
The project proponent proposes a modification to the Green Specific Plan by redirecting a private
street from within Parcel 2 of the Green property in order to gain access to ten lots in the northwest
portion of the site (Parcel). As noted above, original access to the ten lots was proposed from
the north via The Quarry. The private street is proposed to be extended westerly from the northern
most of three potential entry points along Jefferson within the Green property. The private street is
proposed to be approximately 3,000 lineal feet from Jefferson to the boundary of the ten lots with a
right-of-way width of 50-feet. However, only 1,600 lineal feet will cross through Parcel f were there
was previously no disturbance proposed. Therefore, a total of 1.8 acres of land, out of the 211.51
acres within Parcel F will be disturbed. The access point from Jefferson for this private street will
likely be from the northeast corner of the Green property. A secondary emergency access point
will be required by the City through The Quarry development.
5 �� 062 09
Findinas and Facts
The Travertine and Green Specific Plan EIR identified significant or potentially significant
environmental effects associated with the project covered in Section III of the EIR. The findings,
and facts supporting the findings, are required by Section 21081 of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The Facts and Findings
previously approved in the EIR are still applicable and enforceable.
➢ Land Use:
The current zoning for the Green property consists of the following: LDR-Low Density
Residential. This zoning is based on Specific Plan 94-025 approved by the City of La Quinta
City Council in 1995.
Findings
The imposition and enforcement of the conditions and mitigation measures resolve
inconsistencies within existing City General Plan and zoning map designations. The
proposed private street will not require the conversion of any portion of previously
approved open space areas within the Green property.
Emergency access to the ten custom lots would be improved by the proposed Addendum
Project. No significant, short-term, or long-term negative impacts are anticipated. No
cumulative negative impacts are anticipated.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. The proposed private street will not require the conversion of any portion of the
previously approved open space areas within the Green property.
➢ Tragic and Circulation:
A Traffic Impact Study was prepared by Endo Engineering in October 1994 for the Travertine
and Green Specific Plan EIR. The Traffic Impact Study provided the basis for the mitigation
outlined in the Certified EIR. Jefferson Street is not currently constructed and is proposed for
improvement as part of the developments for both Travertine and Green properties. The
Green Specific Plan provides three possible access points from Jefferson Street. No tentative
maps or street alignments have been approved by the City for the Green property. The current
Addendum EIR proposed for this private street extension would utilize one of the three access
points (northerly most). Access to the ten custom lots in the northwest portion of the Green
property was originally proposed as an extension from The Quarry residential and golf course
6 063 030
development to the north of the site. Subsequent to approval in 1995, access from The Quarry
has been changed to the proposed private street.
Findings
The capacity of a typical two-lane road is 10,000 to 12,000 vehicle trips per day. The ten
lots within the Green property will generate approximately 150 trips per day. No additional
traffic impacts will be generated with the extension of the private street.
The private street addition will require an amendment to the Circulation Plan within the
Green Specific Plan, and as such, a Conditional Use Permit is required to allow the private
street within the hillside per Zoning Code Section 9.1.40.040, and parcel map for the
subdivision of property.
Access to the ten custom lots would be improved by the proposed Addendum Project. A
secondary emergency access point will be required by the City though The Quarry
development. No significant, short-term, or long-term negative impacts are anticipated.
No cumulative negative impacts are anticipated.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. The proposed private street will not generate additional traffic impact not already
addressed in the Green Specific Plan EIR.
➢ Noise:
A Noise Impact Study was prepared by Endo Engineering in November 1994 for the Travertine
and Green Specific Plan EIR. The Noise Impact Study provided the basis for the mitigation
outlined in the Certified EIR.
Findings
Within the Draft and Final EIR, the ten lots were originally proposed to gain access from
The Quarry development to the north. The noise formerly associated with traffic within The
Quarry will be transferred to the new proposed access road. No additional noise impacts
will be generated with the extension of the road.
As noted above in the Traffic section, the ten lots within the Green property will generate
approximately 150 trips per day. These 150 vehicle trips will not increase the noise levels
not already discussed in the Travertine and Green Specific Plan Draft and Final EIR.
OG: u31
Noise related to construction of the road will be required to abide by the mitigation
measures approved within the Certified EIR.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. The proposed private street will not generate additional noise impacts not already
addressed in the Green Specific Plan EIR.
A Air Quality:
An Air Quality Impact Study was prepared by Endo Engineering in November 1994 for the
Travertine and Green Specific Plan EIR, The Air Quality Impact Study provided the basis for
the mitigation outlined in the Certified EIR.
Findings
The air quality impacts associated with traffic from the ten lots was originally discussed
and mitigated to the extent feasible within the Travertine and Green Specific Plan Draft
and Final EIR. Significant short-term impacts to air quality will result with implementation
of the Green Specific Plan. However, no additional air quality impacts will be generated
with the extension of the road.
Air Quality impacts related to construction of the road will be required to abide by the
mitigation measures approved within the Final EIR.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. The Green Specific Plan will result in significant short-term impacts to air quality (as
identified in the Certified EIR).
b. Overriding considerations were approved by the City Council for impacts within the
Green Specific Plan that remained significant after mitigation.
c. The proposed private street will not generate additional air quality impacts not already
addressed in the Green Specific Plan EIR.
➢ Water Resources:
Findings
Construction of the private road to the ten approved custom lots will not increase the water
supply/demand or sewer needs discussed in the Certified EIR.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous wrtten
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. The proposed private street will not generate additional water/sewer issues not already
addressed in the Green Specific Plan EIR.
➢ Soils/Geology/Seismic:
Findings
The private road extension would be constructed within Carsitas Gravelly Sand and would
not result in significant impacts from a soils and geology standpoint. In addition, the Green
property, including the proposed private street right-of-way, are not located on designated
prime agricultural soils, nor are they within the Coachella Valley Blowsand region.
Therefore, with implementation of the existing mitigation measures from the Certified EIR,
impacts associated with soil, geology and seismicity on the private road would be less than
significant. No additional soil, geology or seismic impacts will be generated with the
extension of the road.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. impacs not already at
in the Green Specific not generate EIRoil, geology or seismic
➢ Hydrology:
A stormwater analysis was prepared by Mainiero, Smith and Associates, Inc. August 29,
2000, and was performed for the proposed private street extension using the Riverside
County Flood ControllAES unit-hydrograph program. A summary of the stormwater
analysis has been provided below. The report in its entirety is available at the City of La
Quinta Public Works Department.
v33
06v
Findings
Surface drainage under the proposed private street flows from two watershed areas. One
watershed is approximately 320 acres in size, and the second is approximately 125 acres.
These two watershed areas would result in a combined 100-year (Q100) stormwater flow
of approximately 522 cubic feet per second (cfs). In order to contain 522 cfs during a 100-
year storm event, a culvert at the road drainage crossing would be required. The
stormwater analysis indicates that a double box culvert, 5 feet wide by 5 feet deep (each
barrel) would allow the lower flows to pass under the proposed road. The full capacity of
the double box culvert would be in excess of 1000 cfs without any debris.
The imposition and enforcement of this condition and mitigation measure will substantially
reduce the significant, or potentially significant effects of the project on hydrology.
Therefore, project impacts will be reduced to a level of insignificance.
Existing local hydrology and hydraulics would be marginally affected and improved by the
proposed project. No significant, short-term, or long-term negative impacts are
anticipated. No cumulative negative impacts are anticipated.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. The proposed improvements will help alleviate potential "washout" of the new private
road.
➢ Biology:
A biological assessment was conducted for the Green property by Thomas Olsen Associates
in June 1994. The biological assessment provided the basis for the mitigation outlined in the
Certified EIR.
Findings
✓ The imposition and enforcement of the conditions and mitigation measures within the
Draft and Final EIR attempt to mitigate biologically related impacts to less than
significant levels. However, the loss of natural habitat, prescribed sensitive animal
species habitats (including the prairie falcon, blacktailed gnatcatcher, loggerhead
shrike, desert tortoise, the Palm Springs Round -tailed Ground Squirrel and sensitive
bat species habitat's), and the loss of sensitive plants species remained significant
after mitigation. Cumulative impacts to the Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub, desert dry
woodland plant and animal communities remained significant and unavoidable after
mitigation.
In order to mitigate impacts to the extent feasible for the taking of sensitive plant
species and the incremental loss of plant and animal communities with the Coachella
Valley, the following mitigation measure concerning the Multi -species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) was required within the Final EIR for the Travertine and
Green Specific Plans. One purpose of an area -wide multi -species habitat
conservation plan was to provide a vehicle for property owners to mitigate for the loss
of otherwise irreplaceable biological resources.
Mitigation Measure 3.8.1 states that:
The City of La Quinta shall ensure, as proposed by the Coachella Valley
Association of Governments, that mitigation/compensation funds shall be made
available to the Coachella Valley multi species planning process prior to any
habitat impacting activities (grading permit), due to this project. Such funds should
be calculated on the basis of acreage of habitat disturbed, pursuant to a formula
for fees which is equitably and uniformly applied throughout the Coachella Valley.
The method of verification within the Monitoring Program for this mitigation
measure is "Plan Review" by the Community Development Department. The Final
EIR also goes on to state that the City may choose to become the trustee of fund
contributed to CVAG until such time as the MSHCP is adopted.
✓ The biological studies prepared for the Green Specific Plan did not find desert tortoise
or Palm Springs Round -tailed Ground Squirrel habitat and therefore no mitigation was
required for this species:
✓ Since certification of the Draft and Final EIR for the Green Specific Plan, a draft
designation of both Essential and Critical Habitat for the Peninsular bighorn sheep has
been established by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The Final EIR for the Travertine
and Green Specific Plans requires the following mitigation measure in order to mitigate
impacts to the bighorn sheep. Although this mitigation measure was developed
particularly for the Travertine Specific Plan, elements of the measure are still
applicable to the Green Specific Plan.
Mitigation Measure 3.8.3 states that:
The applicant shall ensure that a habitat management plan HMP for the bighorn
sheep is prepared by a biologist, reviewed by the Department of Fish and Game,
and implemented prior to issuance of grading permits. Elements of the
management plant shall include the following measures. These measures will be
required even if the preparation of the HMP is stalled or prevented from being
adopted.
See the Travertine and Green Specific Plans Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program Checklist for the specific measures.
U 3 5
The method of verification within the Monitoring Program for this mitigation
measure is "Approval from California Department of Fish and Game."
✓ Since certification of the Draft and Final EIR for the Green Specific Plan, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers have published new Nationwide Permits (NWP) criteria. The
maximum impact allowed for most NWP's is % acre and formal ACOE notification is
required where impacts exceed 1/10th acre. In addition, NWP 14 (road crossings) will
be limited to a maximum of 200 linear feet of all waters of the U.S.
The access road will require a box culvert for storm drainage of approximately 10 feet
in width. According to engineering calculations provided by the project engineer,
approximately 1/*h (0.10) acre of would be impacted. The same drainage was
crossed within The Quarry project to the north of the site.
✓ If blueline streams are located on the subject property and are subsequently impacted
by construction of the private street, the mitigation measures outlined in the Certified
EIR will mitigate impacts to less than significant levels.
The following mitigation measures has been added to this Addendum EIR:
Based on the information obtained from a site visit by Department of Fish and
Game personnel, the Department has determined that a Lake and/or Streambed
Alteration Agreement under Fish and Game Code Subsection 1600 is required for
this project.
This mitigation measure is hereby incorporated into the Monitoring Program
prepared for the previously Certified Draft and Final EIR. The method of
verification within the Monitoring Program for this mitigation measure is "Approval
from California Department of Fish and Game." See TPM Exhibit.
✓ The proposed private street will not require the conversion of any portion of previously
approved open space areas within the Green property.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. Overriding considerations were approved by the City Council for impacts within the
Green Specific Plan that remained significant after mitigation.
Mitigation measures outlined in the Certified EIR for the Green Specific Plan will be
required for implementation of this Addendum EIR.
12
c. An additional mitigation measure has been added by the California Department of Fish
and Game concerning a Lake andlor Streambed Alteration Agreement.
d. No new impacts not already addressed in the Certified EIR, would result with
implementation of this Addendum EIR.
e. The proposed private street will not require the conversion of any portion of the
previously approved open space areas within the Green property.
➢ Aesthetics/Visual:
Findings
The aesthetic impacts associated with ten lots was originally discussed and mitigated
within the Travertine and Green Specific Plan Draft and Final EIR. No additional aesthetic
impacts will be generated with the extension of the private street
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. The proposed private street will not generate additional aesthetic impacts not already
addressed in the Green Specific Plan EIR.
➢ Cultural Resources:
A Cultural Resources Survey was conducted for the Green property by Dr. Paul Chace,
Director of Cultural Resources with The Keith Companies in July 1994.
Findings
The Cultural Resources analysis prepared by Dr. Paul Chase for the Green Specific Plan
property found no cultural resources. Dr. Chase confirmed for SFC that the original
analysis encompassed the proposed road extension therefore, implementation of the
proposed private street would not impact any new cultural resources. No new studies are
required.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
13 j; l�j U3 7
a. The proposed private street will not generate additional cultural impacts not already
addressed in the Green Specific Plan EIR.
➢ Recreation:
Findings
Construction of the proposed private street would not result in the need for additional par
and recreational facilities within the Green Specific Plan area.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. The proposed private street will not generate the need for additional parks or
recreational facilities within the Green Specific Plan EIR.
➢ Population, Housing and Employment:
Findings
No mitigations were originally proposed for this issue within the Green Specific Plan EIR.
However, project specific and cumulative population, housing and employment impacts
were considered significant and growth inducing within the certified EIR.
The addition of the private street will not increase the number of units previously approved
in the certified EIR.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. Overriding considerations were approved by the City Council for growth inducing
impacts within the Green Specific Plan that remained significant after mitigation.
b. The proposed private street will not generate the need for additional mitigation
measures within the Green Specific Plan EIR.
14 IJ u38
➢ Risk of Upset:
Findings
No impacts were anticipated on the Green Specific Plan property related to the risk of
upset.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
a. The proposed private street will not create a new risk of upset within the Green
Specific Plan EIR.
➢ Public Services and Utilities:
Findings
Law enforcement, fire protection, medical and transit services will benefit from construction
of the proposed private street. Schools, electricity, gas, telephone, cable service, solid
waste issues will not be impacted by construction of the private street.
Emergency access to the ten custom lots would be improved by the proposed Addendum
Project. No significant, short-term, or long-term negative impacts are anticipated. No
cumulative negative impacts are anticipated.
Facts
The City Council has based its findings upon the project's Final EIR, previous written
public comments, previous written responses to comments and all previous oral and
written testimony and other evidence presented at the public hearings on this project and
particularly the following facts:
onal
a services and utilities not already addressed in the Green Specific Plan EIR.
public
The, proposed private street will not generate the need for EIR.
� lr
15 U39
r` I.': 'r.'if
a I
6
North
LOCAL VICINITY MAP
U7"
17
u41.
f
,iLL9d; � tppp N
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 3,000 LINEAL FOOT PRIVATE
ROAD OF WHICH 1,600 LINEAL FEET WILL BE
WITHIN THE HILLSIDE THAT EXCEEDS 20 PERCENT
CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-047
APPLICANT: AGIOTAGE LTD.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 24' day of October, 2000, 10" day of April, 2001, and 8" day of May,
2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearings to consider the request of Agiotage Limited,
for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a portion of a private
road within hillside areas with a slope over 20 percent, located approximately '/2 mile
south of Avenue 58 on the east and west sides of future Jefferson Street, more
particularly described as:
APN: 761-030-001
WHEREAS, said Conditional Use Permit 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
Impact Report 94-287 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164. No changed
circumstances or conditions and no new information provided which would trigger the
preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21 1 66;
and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending to the
City Council approval of said Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Section 9.210.020:
A. Consistency with the General Plan/Zoning Ordinance
Residential development planned by Specific Plan 94-025 is consistent with the
General Plan Land Use Element.
The portion of the proposed road into hillside areas of SP 94-025 is necessary
to provide access within the Specific Plan boundaries (i.e., 10 custom lot). The
design width of the road at 28 feet is a small as possible to limit hillside grading
A:AResoPC CUP47green.wpd, 44 Greg T. - Page 1
07 v4lj
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditional Use Permit 99-047, Agiotage LTD.
May 8, 2001
Page 2
activities and sloped less than a 15% gradient in compliance with Section
9.140.040 (H.C. Hillside Conservation) of the Zoning Ordinance.
This project has been designed to be consistent with the provisions of the
Zoning Code and applicable Specific Plan or will be conditioned to be so in areas
of design development standards, etc.
B. Compliance with CEQA
The Specific Plan EIR identified significant or potentially significant
environmental effect associated with the project covered in Section III of the
EIR. The findings, and facts supporting the findings, are required by Section
21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act and Section 15091 of the
State CEQA Guidelines. The Facts and Findings previously approved in the EIR
are still applicable and enforceable. Substantial changes are not proposed by
development of the road.
C. Surrounding Land Uses
The site design of the project is appropriate for the intended uses pursuant
Specific Plan 94-025 and compatible with surrounding development.
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. This 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 Impact Report
(#941 12047) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164. No changed circumstances
or conditions exist and no new information has been provided which would
require the preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21166; and
A:AResoPC CUP47green.wpd, 44 Greg T. - Page 2
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditional Use Permit 99-047, Agiotage LTD.
May 8, 2001
Page 3
3. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council for the reasons set
forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions, labeled Exhibit
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 81h day of May, 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
A:AResoPC CUP47green.wpd, 44 GregT. -Page 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- Exhibit "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-047 - AGIOTAGE LIMITED
MAY 8, 2001
GENERAL
1. The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits
contained in Specific Plan 94-025 (Amendment #1), unless otherwise amended
by the following conditions.
2. The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of
the City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 94-025 (Amendment
#1), FEIR 94-287 Addendum, CUP 99-047 and TPM 28617. The City of La
Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion.
U79 u46
Cond CUP 47 Green 44-greg, Page 1
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT #1 TO SPECIFIC PLAN
94-025
CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025, AMENDMENT #1
APPLICANT: AGIOTAGE LIMITED
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 241h
day of October, 2000, 10`h day of April, 2001, and 8`h day of May, 2001, hold duly
a noticed Public Hearings to consider the request of Agiotage Limited for approval of
Amendment #1 to Specific Plan 94-025 to allow a private road along the north side
of the Plan's boundary to serve ten single family houses in Parcel 3 of Tentative Parcel
Map 28617 for property located on the east and west sides of future Jefferson Street,
approximately %2 mile south of Avenue 58, more particulary described as:
Portion of the South '/2 of Section 29, T6S, R7E, SBBM (APN: 761-030-001)
WHEREAS, said Specific Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements
of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as
amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council), in that the La
Quinta Community Development Department has prepared an Addendum to
Environmental Assessment 94-287 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164 Addendum.
No change circumstances or conditions exist and no new information provided which
would require preparation of a subsequent EIR, pursuant to Public Resources Code
21 166; and
WHEREAS, on June 6, 1995, the La Quinta City Council certified the EIR for
Specific Plan 94-025 (Resolution 95-36) as adequate and complete, adopted
"Statements of Overriding Considerations," and adopted "CEQA Findings and
Statements of Facts"; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 13`h day of April, 1999, hold
a duly noticed Public Hearing on SP 94-025 (111 Time Extension), and by a vote of 5-0,
adopted Resolution 99-026 approving a first time extension and text changes to the
Plan; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning
Commission did find the following facts and reasons pursuant to Section 9.240.010
of the Zoning Ordinance to justify the recommendation for approval of the Specific
Plan Amendment:
A:AResoPC SP25#1 green.wpd - 44greg t- Page 1 4 - 0 6 (U 4 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2000-
Specific Plan 94-025, Amendment #1
May 8, 2001
Page 2
A. Consistency with the General Plan
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals and policies
of the La Quinta General Plan in that the residential uses are proposed for Low
Density Residential areas and open spaces will be preserved excluding
development of a new road to serve ten custom lots. The roadway width has
been kept to a minimum to reduce damage to the affected hillside areas. The
Specific Plan contains a summary of each of the goals and policies applicable
in evaluating the document's consistency with the General Plan. Overall, the
Specific Plan offers guidelines promoting a balanced and functional mix of land
uses consistent with the City's General Plan. The maximum number of
residential units is 277.
B. Public Welfare
The Specific Plan Amendment contains a summary of each of the goals and
policies applicable in evaluating the document's consistency with the General
Plan. Overall, the Amendment offers guidelines promoting a balanced mix of
residential land uses consistent with the City's General Plan. Any development
within hillside areas shall comply with Section 9.140.040 of the Zoning
Ordinance which requires specific engineering studies and limits the roadway
grade to 15%.
C. Land Use Compatibility
The Specific Plan Amendment is compatible with zoning on adjacent properties
in that the General Plan Land Use Policy Diagram shows the surrounding
properties to be primarily Low Density Residential.
D. Property Suitability
The Specific Plan Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental
to the public general welfare in the proposed road extension is compatible with
existing land uses.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California as follows:
That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case; and
AS
A:\ResoPC SP25#1 green.wpd - 44greg t - Page 2 LI <S 1
Planning Commission Resolution 2000-
Specific Plan 94-025, Amendment #1
May 8, 2001
Page 3
2. This 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 Impact Report
(#941 12047) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164. No changed circumstances
or conditions exist and no new information has been provided which would
require the preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21166; and
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above -
described Amendment request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution,
subject to the attached conditions, labeled Exhibit "A".
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8th day of May, 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
A:\ResoPC SP25#1green.wpd - 44greg t - Page 3 - 082 U A 9
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- Exhibit "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025, AMENDMENT #1 - AGIOTAGE LIMITED
MAY 8, 2001
GENERAL
The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of
the City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding FEIR 94-287 Addendum,
CUP 99-047 and TPM 28617. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to
select its defense counsel in its sole discretion.
2. Specific Plan 94-025 (Amendment #1) shall comply with the requirements and
standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land
Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions.
3. The development shall comply with Exhibit "A" of Specific Plan 94-025
(Amendment #1) and those exhibits contained in the Final EIR and Addendum
and the following conditions, which shall take precedence in the event of any
conflicts with the provisions of the Specific Plan.
4. The approved Specific Plan text on file with the Community Development
Department shall be revised to incorporate the following conditions. Four copies
of the final document shall be submitted after final approval by the City Council
with an additional copy being unbound.
LANDSCAPING
5. Seventy -percent of the trees planted in the parkway shall be specimen trees
(e.g., 24"- and 36"-boxes) having a minimum caliper size of 1 .5- to 2.0-inches.
Specimen trees shall be a minimum of 10 feet tall measured from the top of the
container.
6. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas,
medians, common retention basins, and park facilities shall be prepared by a
licensed landscape architect.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community
Development Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be
submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City
Engineer. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been
approved and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District,
u�O
'.._ O83
AMond3P 25 GrAmen#1.wpd - 44 Greg Trousdel Page I of 4
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 94-025, Amendment #1
April 10, 2001
and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner.
7. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planting materials shall be
required for at least 90% of common planting areas. Provisions shall also be
made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby
wildlife. No building permits shall be issued for Parcel 3 houses until
landscaping improvements are installed along the private hillside road.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
8. All water mains and fire hydrants providing the required fire flows shall be
constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code in effect at the time of
development.
9. The level of service required for this project shall be aligned with the criteria for
Catalog II -Urban as outlined in the Fire Protection Master Plan and as follows:
A. Fire station located within three miles.
B. Receipt of full "first alarm"assignment within 15 minutes.
Impacts to the Fire Department are generally due to the increased number of
emergency and public service calls generated by additional buildings and human
population. A fiscal analysis for this project shall identify a funding source to
mitigate any impacts associated with any capital costs and the annual operating
costs necessary for an increased level of service. Said analysis shall be subject
to review and approval by the Riverside County Fire Department and the City
of La Quinta.
PROPOSED TEXT DOCUMENT CHANGES
10. Add to Page 22 (Circulation Section) -
1. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to
conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1. 58th Avenue, Jefferson Street and 62nd Avenue in
accordance with the Jefferson Street Alignment Plan.
Development of Phases II and III, as defined in the "Phasing
Plan" diagram of this specific plan, shall not begin until at
vv u5T
A:Wondff 25 GrAmen#1.wpd - 44 Greg TrousdelL , `, U `Page 2 of 4
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 94-025, Amendment #1
April 10, 2001
least two lanes of the realigned streets have been installed
from 58th Avenue to the south line of Section 29.
2. Jefferson Street (adjacent to this development) -
a. Improvement section as determined by the Jefferson
Street Alignment Plan. If the City finds it necessary
to revise or abandon the Jefferson Street specific
alignment contemplated at the time of approval of
this specific plan, the applicant shall revise this
specific plan as required by the City to fully address
revised access routing.
b. Construct 76-foot improvement (travel width,
excluding curbs) plus 6-foot sidewalk on east side of
street and 10-foot multi -use trail on west side of
street (design to be approved by City).
B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CUL DE SAC
Residential - Street widths shall comply with the
requirements of the Circulation Element (Table CIR-2) of the
General Plan.
2. Collector (2:300 homes or 3,000 vehicles per day) - 40-feet
wide.
2. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted to
locations shown on the "Circulation" diagram of the specific plan, subject
to review by the Planning Commission and City Council during review of
the subdivision map applications. Provide a secondary (emergency)
access entry (20-foot wide) from Parcel 3 through The Quarry.
3. "The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual
maintenance of all required improvements unless and until expressly
released from said responsibility by the City. This shall include formation
of a homeowner's association or other arrangement acceptable to the
City for maintenance of retention basins, common areas, Open Space
lettered lots, and perimeter walls and landscaping."
1 1 . Modify Page 17 (First paragraph, Last sentence) as follows: "Ten custom lots
are proposed in the northwestern corner of the site, and will gain emergency
access through The Quarry and primary access from Jefferson Street via a 28-
foot wide private road (curb to curb) pursuant to the design standards of
Tentative Parcel Map 28617 and Conditional Use Permit 99-047.
u52
kWond3P 25 GrAmen#l.wpd - 44 Greg Trousdell. (i IJ Jage 3 of 4
AV uO
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 94-025, Amendment #1
April 10, 2001
12. The applicant shall dedicate public street right of way and utility easements in
conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific
plans, and as required by the City Engineer.
Dedication required by this development include:
A. Jefferson Street - Full width right of way pursuant to the Jefferson Street
Alignment Plan made part of/or adopted with General Plan Amendment
95-048.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
Residential: 29-foot width. 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.
13. The applicant shall create a 10-foot wide Multi -Purpose Easement within the
required 20-foot landscape easement on the west side of Jefferson Street.
11, Q86 u53
MCoudSP 25 GrAmeudl.wpd - 44 Greg TrousdelL Page 4 of 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE APPROXIMATELY 331
ACRES INTO FOUR LOTS AND OTHER STREET
LOTS LOCATED ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES
OF FUTURE JEFFERSON STREET, APPROXIMATELY
'/2 MILE SOUTH OF AVENUE 58
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28617
APPLICANT: AGIOTAGE LIMITED
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 241h day of October, 2000, 101h day of April, 2001, and 81h day of May,
2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearings to subdivide 331 acres into four lots and
other lettered lots (Lots "A" and "B") in Specific Plan 94-025 generally located on the
east and west sides of future Jefferson Street, approximately '/2 miles south of
Avenue 58, more particularly described as:
Portion of the South % of Section 29, T6S, R7E, SEEM (APN: 761-030-001)
WHEREAS, said Parcel Map has complied with the requirements of "The
Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended;
Resolution 83-63 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community
Development Department has prepared an Addendum to Environmental Assessment
83-009 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164 Addendum. No changed circumstances
or conditions exist which require preparation of a subsequent EIR, pursuant to Public
Resources Code 21 166; and,
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending
approval to the City Council of said Tentative Parcel Map 28617 pursuant to Section
13.12.130 of the Subdivision Ordinance:
Finding Number 1 - Proposed Map Consistency with the General Plan and Specific Plan
94-025 (Amendment #1)
The proposed parcel map is consistent with the City's General Plan Low Density
Residential and Open Space land use designations pursuant to Specific Plan 94-
025 (Amendment #1). Road development in hillside areas shall be consistent
with the provisions of Section 9.140.040 of the Zoning Code, and the
environmental impact mitigation measures of the Green Specific Plan.
A:\RESOpc TPM 28617 Green.wpd, 44 Greg T. Page 1 087 v 51
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TPM 28617, Agiotage LTD.
May 8, 2001
Page 2
The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the City's General Plan
with the implementation of Conditions of Approval to provide streets and
adequate stormwater drainage via retention basins, culverts, etc.
Finding Number 2 - Consistency of Design and Improvements with the General Plan
and Specific Plan 94-025 (Amendment #1)
The design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with
the City's General Plan and Specific Plan 94-025. Implementation of the
recommended conditions of approval ensures proper street widths and road
design standards are met.
Finding_Number 3 - Consistency with the California Environmental Quality Act
The original Green Specific Plan EIR identified significant or potentially
significant environmental effect associated with the project covered in Section
III of the EIR. The findings, and facts supporting the findings, are required by
Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act and Section 15091
of the State CEQA Guidelines. The Facts and Findings previously approved in
the EIR are still applicable and enforceable. Substantial changes are not
proposed by development of the road.
Finding Number 4 - Consistency of Public Easements
As conditioned, the design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not
conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or
use of, property within the subdivision.
Finding Number 5 - Public Health and Safety
The design of the subdivision and type of improvements, as conditioned, are not
likely to cause serious public health problems, in that this issue was considered
in Specific Plan 94-025 (Amendment #1) in which no significant health or
safety impacts were identified for the proposed project.
Finding Number 6 - Suitability of Site
The design of the subdivision, or the proposed improvements, are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially, and unavoidably injure
A:\RESOpc TPM 28617 Green.wpd, 44 Greg T. Page 2
0s3 u5 5
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TPM 28617, Agiotage LTD.
May 8, 2001
Page 3
fish or wildlife, or their habitat, in that SP 94-025 (Amendment #1) prepared for
Parcel Map 28617 did not identify any significant impacts for this issue.
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; and
2. That it does hereby require compliance with Specific Plan 94-025 (Amendment
#1); and
3. This 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 Impact Report
(#941 12047) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164. No changed circumstances
or conditions exist and no new information has been provided which would
require the preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21166; and
4. That it does recommend approval of Tentative Parcel Map 28617 to the City
Council for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions, labeled Exhibit "A".
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8`h day of May, 2001, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
A:\RESOpc TPM 28617 Green.wpd, 44 Greg T. Page 3
089 u56
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TPM 28617, Agiotage LTD.
May 8, 2001
Page 4
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
AARESOpc TPM 28617 Green.wpd, 44 Greg T. Page 4
7
:..; -- 0J J u
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- Exhibit "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 28617, AGIOTAGE LIMITED
MAY 8, 2001
GENERAL
1 . Tentative Parcel Map 28617, dated April 5, 2001, shall comply with the
requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of
La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following
conditions.
2. The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of
the City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 94-025 (Amendment
#1), FEIR 94-287 Addendum, and CUP 99-047. The City of La Quinta shall
have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion.
3. The development shall comply with Exhibit "A" of Specific Plan 94-025
(Amendment #1) and those exhibits contained in the Final EIR and Addendum
and the following conditions, which shall take precedence in the event of any
conflicts with the provisions of the Specific Plan.
4. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the
Conditions of Approval, phasing plans shall be submitted to the Public Works
Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The phasing plans
are not approved until they are signed by the City Engineer.
The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations in
the order of the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required
of each phase shall be complete and satisfied prior to completion of homes or
occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a sub -phasing plan
is approved by the City Engineer.
5. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any
building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits
and/or clearances from the following Departments and/or agencies:
* Fire Marshal
* Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
* Community Development Department
* Riverside County Environmental Health Department
* Desert Sands and Coachella Valley Unified School Districts
* Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
* Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
0�1 u53
A:ICondTPM28G17Gr.F1na1-wpd - 44 greg Page 1. of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 2
* Verizon
* California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit)
* Time Warner
* Sunline Transit
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances
from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement
plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City
approvals and signatures on the plans.
Evidence of permits or clearances from the above jurisdictions shall be
presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of the application
for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith.
6. The Specific Plan Draft and Final EIR and Addendum shall be used in the review
of all project proposals in the Specific Plan 94-025 area. Said mitigation
measures are hereby incorporated into these conditions by reference.
6. Prior to issuance of the final map the applicant shall make the following lot
designations:
A. The "Open Space" portions of Parcels 1 and 2 shall be designated as
separate lettered "Open Space" lots (i.e., Lots C and D);
B. The private street providing access to Parcel 3 shall be designated as a
lettered lot (Lot "B");
C. Parcel 2 shall show a 29-foot wide access easement extending from
Jefferson Street to the private street providing access to Parcel 3.
7. 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.
S. The applicant shall dedicate an easement or reserve unto themselves, their
successors, and assigns an undevelopable natural open space easement over
lettered lots "C" through "D" (designated as "Open Space" lots on the Final Map)
and Parcel 4 for preservation of natural open space in perpetuity.
9 This tentative map and any final maps thereunder shall comply with the
requirements and standards of §§66410 through 66499.58 of the California
u 59
A:ICondTPMZ8617GrY1na1.wpd - 44 grog Page 2 of 15
e. 11J2
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 3
Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta
Municipal Code (LQMC)
PROPERTY RIGHTS
10. All easements, rights -of -way and other property rights necessary to facilitate the
ultimate use of the subdivision and functioning of improvements shall be
dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the process of said dedication,
granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of a final map or filing
of a Certificate of Compliance for waiver of a final map. The conferral shall
include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for access
to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of all required
improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels.
1 1 . If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights -of -way
or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned
by others, the applicant shall provide to those properties alternate rights -of -way
or access easements on alignments approved by the City Council.
12. The applicant shall dedicate public street right-of-way and utility easements in
conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific
plans, and as required by the City Engineer.
Dedication required of this development include:
A. Jefferson Street (Lot "A") - Full -width right-of-way pursuant to the
Jefferson Street Alignment Plan made part of/or adopted with General
Plan Amendment 95-048.
PRIVATE STREETS
A. Residential: 29-foot width (Lot "B"). 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.
Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and
left turn lanes, bus turnouts, etc.
The applicant shall dedicate street rights -of -way prior to required approvals of
U0O
A:TondTFM28817Gr.F1na1.wpd - 44 greg Page 3 of 15
093
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 4
any proposed subdivision or improvements to land within the specific plan
boundaries.
If the City Engineer determines that public access rights to proposed street
rights -of -way shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of
final maps dedicating the rights -of -way, then developer shall grant temporary
public access easements to those areas within 60-days of written request by
the City.
13. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot wide public utility easements contiguous
with and along both sides of all private streets.
14. 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):
Jefferson Street - 20 feet
The setback requirement applies to all frontage including, but not limited to,
remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
Where sidewalks, bike paths, and/or equestrian trails are required, the applicant
shall dedicate blanket easements over the setback lots for those purposes.
15. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Jefferson Street from lots
abutting the street. Access to the development from Jefferson Street shall be
restricted to that shown on the "Circulation" diagram in the specific plan.
16. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access
to utility lines and structures, park lands, drainage basins, common areas, and
mailbox clusters.
17. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any
portion of this property between the date of approval of this specific plan by the
City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same
portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City
Engineer.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
18. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or enter
into a secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations
u 6 1.
A:ICondTPM286176r.F1naLwpd-44grog Page 4 of 15
I- (i j i
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 5
required by the City for any tentative tract or parcel map or approved phase of
development prior to approval of the map or phase or issuance of a certificate
of compliance in -lieu of a final map.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing
structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
19. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of
the improvement costs. The estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit
costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not contained in the
City's schedule of costs, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside
agencies shall be approved by those agencies.
20. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative
approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements (i.e.,
streets) and development -wide improvements (i.e., perimeter walls, common
area and setback landscaping, and gates) shall be constructed or secured prior
to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the engineer.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
21. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted
on 24" X 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading", "Precise Grading",
"Streets and Drainage", and "Landscaping". All plans shall have signature
blocks for the City Engineer and are not approved for construction until they are
signed.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike
paths, gates and entryways, parking lots, and water and sewer plans.
Combined plans including water and sewer improvements shall have an
additional signature block for the CVWD. The combined plans shall be signed
by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature.
"Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscaping improvements, irrigation,
lighting, and perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above, shall be in formats approved by the
City Engineer.
r,
U s�
AAondTPM286176r.F1naLwpd - 44 grog . L age 5 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 6
22. The City may maintain digitized standard plans for elements of construction.
For a fee established by City resolution, the developer may acquire the standard
plan computer files or standard plan sheets prepared by the City.
When final plans are approved by the City, the developer shall furnish accurate
computer files of the complete, approved plans on storage media and in program
format acceptable to the City Engineer.
GRADING
23. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand
nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with
other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments.
24. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering
investigation shall be conducted. The report of the investigation ("the soils
report") shall be submitted with the grading plan.
25. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet
the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit.
The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report
and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering
geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of
this development, that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section
17953 of the Health and Safety Code.
26. Grading plans adjacent to General Plan designated open space areas shall
comply with the requirements of Sections 9.110.070 (Hillside Conservation
Overlay District) and 9.140.040 (Hillside Conservation Regulations) of the
Zoning Ordinance.
27. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant
shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in
accordance with Chapter 6.16, La Quinta Municipal Code. In accordance with
said Chapter, the applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the
City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the
permit.
28. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant shall provide a separate
document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer,
u63
A:TondTPM28617Gr.FinaLwpd - 44 greg , ^ L J DJ 6 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 7
geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The
document shall, for each building pad in the development, state the pad
elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly
identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by development
phase and lot number and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at
different times.
DRAINAGE
29. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm
shall be retained on site (rather than detained and released as proposed in the
specific plan document)• The tributary drainage area for which the developer
is responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets.
30. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual
lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for
lots 2.5 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is
determined by the City Engineer to be impractical.
31. If individual lot retention is approved, the following conditions shall apply:
A. Each private lot proposed for on -site retention shall be designed to
receive and safely convey stormwater in excess of retention capacity,
including inflow from adjacent properties. Front yards shall drain to the
street unless constrained by the overall lay of the land. Basin capacity
calculations and grading plans for each lot shall consider previously -
approved grading plans for adjacent properties and shall be submitted,
with copies of the previously approved adjacent lot plans, to the City
Engineer for plan checking and approval.
B. Prior to or concurrently with recordation of the final subdivision map, a
homeowner's association or lot owner's association (HOA) shall be
legally established and Covenants, Conditions and Restriction (CC & Rs)
recorded. The CC & Rs shall stipulate the requirement for design,
construction and maintenance of individual on lot basins and the required
retention capacity for each individual lot. The CC & Rs shall grant the
HOA irrevocable rights to enter and maintain each individual retention
basin and all other grading and facilities necessary for the stormwater
retention design.
The CC & Rs shall establish, in an irrevocable manner that:
1 . The HOA has responsibility for the overall retention capacity of the
development; U 6 9.
A:UndTPM28617Gr.F1na1.wpd - 44 greg • _ U J Page 7 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 8
2. If the HOA fails to maintain the overall retention capacity, the City
shall have the right to seek other remedies to restore and/or
maintain the overall capacity or to establish or expand downstream
facilities to mitigate the off -site effects of the HOA's failure to
maintain the overall capacity; and
3. The HOA shall promptly reimburse the City for any and all costs
incurred in exercising such right.
C. The final subdivision map shall establish a perpetual easement granting
the City the right to enter and maintain retention basins and other
drainage facilities and grading as necessary to preserve or restore the
approved stormwater conveyance and retention design with no
compensation to any property owner of the HOA.
40. In design of retention facilities, the basin percolation rate shall be considered to
be zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise.
Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1 . If retention is on individual lots,
the retention depth shall not exceed two feet. If retention is in one or more
common retention basins, the retention depth shall not exceed six feet.
41. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance
water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leachfield approved by
the City Engineer. The sand filter and leachfield shall be designed to contain
surges of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. (of landscape area) and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq.
ft.
42. No fence or wall shall be constructed around retention basins except as
approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer.
43. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
44. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention
capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow outlet
and into the historic drainage relief route.
45. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received
and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief
route.
u6�1
A:XondTPMZ8617Gr.FinaLwpd-44greg rill Tage 8 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 9
46. If any portion of the 100-year, 24-hour storm flow from this development is to
be conveyed directly or indirectly to bodies of water subject to the NPDES, the
applicant may be required to design and install first -flush storage, oil/water
separation devices, or other screening or pretreatment method(s) to minimize
the potential for conveyance of stormwater contamination to off -site locations.
Drainage to off -site locations an methods of treatment or screening shall meet
the approval of the City Engineer and other agencies that have jurisdiction.
UTILITIES
47. Existing and proposed wire and cable utilities within or adjacent to the proposed
development shall be underground. Power lines exceeding 35 kv are exempt
from this requirement.
48. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of
all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal
cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone strands, to ensure
optimum placement for aesthetic as well as practical purposes.
49. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground
utilities shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. The
applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for
approval of the City Engineer.
STREETS AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
50. The City is contemplating adoption of a major infrastructure and thoroughfare
improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation
of any final map or issuance of a Certificate of Compliance for any waived final
map, the development or portions thereof shall be subject to the provisions of
the ordinance.
If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement
program, the applicant shall design and construct street improvements as listed
below.
51. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be
prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard
and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City
Engineer.
u6�
A: ICondTPM28617Gr.Fina1.wpd - 44 grog "" �� `� rage 9 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 10
Street right-of-way geometry for cul-de-sacs, knuckle turns and corner
cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801,
and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design procedure for a
20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading,
including site and building construction traffic. The minimum pavement sections
shall be as follows:
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section which will be
subjected to traffic loadings, the partial section shall be designed with a strength
equivalent to the 20-year design strength.
52. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization
markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox
clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City
Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required.
53. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond subdivision
boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street
width transitions, or other incidental work which will insure that newly
constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and
conform with the City's standards and practices.
54. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform
with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1 . 58th Avenue, Jefferson Street and 62nd Avenue in accordance with
the Jefferson Street Alignment Plan.
Development of Phases II and III, as defined in the "Phasing Plan"
diagram of this specific plan, shall not begin until at least two lanes of
the realigned streets have been installed from 58th Avenue to the
south line of Section 29.
a. 10ll
us
A: ICondTPM28617Gr.Fiaai.wpd-44greg Page 10of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 11
2. Jefferson Street (adjacent to this development) - Improvement section
as determined by the Jefferson Street Alignment Plan. If the City finds
it necessary to revise or abandon the Jefferson Street specific
alignment contemplated at the time of approval of this specific plan,
the applicant shall revise this specific plan as required by the City to
fully address revised access routing.
B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CUL DE SAC
1 . Residential (Lot "B") - 28' minimum gutter flow line to gutter flow line,
parking prohibited. Parking restriction shall be provided for and
enforced by the Homeowners Association.
2. Collector (>>>300 homes or 3,000 vehicles per day) - 40-feet wide.
55. All streets proposed for residential or other access drives shall be designed and
constructed with curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to
convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas.
56. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted to locations
shown on the "Circulation" diagram of the specific plan, subject to review by the
Planning Commission and City Council during review of the subdivision map
application(s). Provide a secondary (emergency) access entry (20-foot wide)
from Parcel 3 through The Quarry.
57. Prior to occupancy of completed buildings within the development, the applicant
shall install traffic control devices and street name signs along access roads to
those buildings.
58. The applicant shall provide public transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit
and/or the City Engineer. These amenities shall include, as a minimum, a bus
turnout location and passenger waiting shelter. The location and character of the
turnout and shelter shall be as determined by Sunline Transit and the City
Engineer.
LANDSCAPING
59. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback
areas or lots along Jefferson Street pursuant to Section 9.60.240 of the Zoning
Ordinance. The concept landscape plan for Jefferson Street shall be approved
by the Planning Commission during review of a Site Development Permit and/or
101 u68
A:WondTPM28G17Gr.FinaLwpd-44grog Page 11 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 12
subdivision map application. Seventy -percent of the trees planted in the parkway
shall be specimen trees (e.g., 24"- and 36"-boxes) having a minimum caliper size
of 1.5- to 2.0-inches. Specimen trees shall be a minimum of 10 feet tall
measured from the top of the container.
60. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas,
medians, common retention basins, and park facilities shall be prepared by a
licensed landscape architect.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development
Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to
the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The
plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed
by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside
County Agricultural Commissioner.
Conceptual front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted for approval by the
Planning Commission during consideration of any Site Development Plan
application.
61. 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 and private streets.
62. Slopes shall not exceed 3:1 in perimeter setbacks, medians and other publicly -
or commonly -maintained landscape areas.
63. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins and park areas
shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard
tractor -mounted equipment.
64. The applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated
to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures.
65. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planting materials shall be
required for at least 90% of common planting areas. Provisions shall also be
made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby
wildlife.
A:XondTPN1?A17Gr.FinaL Wpd - 44 greg
1.02 u69
Page 12 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 13
FIRE DEPARTMENT
66. All water mains and fire hydrants providing the required fire flows shall be
constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code in effect at the time of
development.
67. The level of service required for this project shall be aligned with the criteria for
Catalog II -Urban as outlined in the Fire Protection Master Plan and as follows:
A. Fire station located within three miles.
B. Receipt of full "first alarm" assignment within 15 minutes.
Impacts to the Fire Department are generally due to the increased number of
emergency and public service calls generated by additional buildings and human
population. A fiscal analysis for this project shall identify a funding source to
mitigate any impacts associated with any capital costs and the annual operating
costs necessary for an increased level of service. Said analysis shall be subject
to review and approval by the Riverside County Fire Department and the City of
La Quinta.
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
68. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the CVWD at time
development plans are submitted. During project development all irrigation
facilities shall be designed to utilize reclaimed water sources when such sources
become available.
ELECTRICAL UTILITIES
69. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Imperial Irrigation District
at time development plans are submitted.
RECREATION
70. Prior to any final map approval by the City Council, the applicant shall meet the
parkland dedication requirements as set forth in Section 13.24.030, La Quinta
Municipal Code and in compliance with the goals and policies of the La Quinta
Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
AftCondTPM28617Gr.Final.wpd - 99 greg Page 13 of 15 U .` O
103
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 14
QUALITY ASSURANCE
71. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
72. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet
of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -
Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the
engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings.
MAINTENANCE
73. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all
required improvements unless and until expressly released from said responsibility
by the City. This shall include formation of a homeowner's association or other
arrangement acceptable to the City for maintenance of retention basins, common
areas and perimeter walls and landscaping.
74. The applicant shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet for
streets, landscaping and related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage
facilities, or any other improvements to be maintained by an HOA. The booklet
should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures
and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist
the HOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
75. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan
checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those
in effect when the applicant makes application for the plan checks and permits.
The applicant shall additionally pay any fees of any nature required by the City
at the time of recording of the final map or the issuance of a building permit
according to the fee requirements in effect at the time of issuance or approvals
for those items.
76. Prior to approval of a final map or completion of any approval process for
modification of boundaries of the property subject to these conditions, the
applicant shall process a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against
the property and pay all costs of the reapportionment.
77. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the
following: "Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall
A:WondTPAMG17Gr.FinaLwpd - 44 grog
10 u73.
' .. ' Page l4of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Parcel Map 28617
May 8, 2001
Page 15
provide the Building and Safety Department with written clearance from the
affected school district stating that the per -unit impact fees have been paid."
78. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's
adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
MISCELLANEOUS
79. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination system (NPDES) and the City's NPDES permit.
80. Prior to issuance of any site permits, the developer shall submit to the
Community Development Department a detailed construction plan for the
project's Multi -Purpose Trail. This plan shall include access, signage, and detailed
design. The applicant shall create a 10-foot wide Multi -Purpose Easement within
the required 20-foot landscape easement plus the west side of Jefferson Street
right-of-way.
FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(Sl
82. 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.
02
�-a
A:XondTPN=6176r.FinaLwpd-44grog - e I5 of 15
ATTACHMENTS
u73
IUG
Attachment 1
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
7. There being no further ssion, it was moved aet2001
by
Commissioners yler to adopt Planninission
Resolution 200 approving Conditional Us -057,
as recomm
ROLL CALL S: Commissioners Ab utter, Kirk, Tyler, and
hairman Robbins. None. ABSENT: Nonce
ABSTAIN: None.
irIt was moved and ed by Commissioner utter to
adopt Planning C sion Resolution 200 pproving Site
Development 2001 695, as rec0 ed.
ROLL CALL: Commissioners A Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
Irman Robbins. NO : None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
C. Environmental Assessment 94-287 Addendum Specific Plan 94-025
Amendment #1 Conditional Use Permit 99-047, and Tentative Parcel
Map 28617; a request of Agiotage Limited/Mainiero, Smith and
Associates for Certification of an Environmental Impact Report
Addendum allowing a new access road for an approved master planned
residential community of 277 hours; Development of a private road on a
hillside slope exceeding 20 percent; Amend the Specific Plan allowing a
3,000 foot long private access road along the north side of a 330.70
acre property to serve ten custom lots; and a Tentative Parcel Map
subdividing 330.70 acres into four parcels and other lettered street lots
located at the bisection of the future Jefferson Street, approximately one
half mile south of Avenue 58.
Commissioner Tyler asked Assistant City Attorney Ramirez that
since they had just been handed this multi -page document
pertaining to this project and somehow they were to absorb it and
let it inter their thinking as they make a determination on this
project, did they have to acknowledge the contents. He has
objected previously and is objecting again to these fifth hour
submittals and his question are: a) do they have consider at this
late entry; and b) if they do need to consider it, can they continue
it to allow adequate time to consider it. Assistant City Attorney
Ramirez stated staff and his office have had time to review the
letter and digest its contents and he will have comments on this
letter during the hearing process. They will provide the
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01 .wpd 3
U74
107
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
Commission with an assessment of the letter as well as the
impact, or reported impact, on the previously adopted EIR and
Addendum before the Commission. The Commission does have
to consider it at this late time as it has been provided prior to the
Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Tyler stated that
may be well and good but staff and the Attorney's office are not
the ones voting on the project. The Commissioners are and they
have not had the time to digest its contents. Assistant City
Attorney Ramirez stated he understood this and certainly it was
not an ideal situation. Staff always encourages early participation
but it is not always the case and the only thing staff can do is help
the Commission understand the contents and impact of the
contents. Commissioner Tyler stated he appreciated the advice,
but his immediate reaction is to put it aside and dwell only on the
information that was given to him in his agenda packet.
2. Chairman Robbins stated that sometimes the purpose of a late
entry is to get the Commission to postpone their decision.
Assistant City Attorney Ramirez stated the Commission could ask
Mr. Hogan of the Center for Biological Diversity, who wrote the
letter, why it was so late.
3. Commissioner Butler stated he concurred with Commissioner
Tyler's comments and strongly resented the letter being presented
at the last hour. If they have the ability to produce a document
such as this they also have the ability to get it to the City in a
timely for them to review it and not have to rely on staff to read
and digest it for them. As he is voting on this tonight, he agrees
with Commissioner Tyler, that he would reject the document
based on the basis that he has never had the opportunity to even
read it, although he recognizes that is nothing they can deal with
at this meeting. He would like them to know if it happens again,
don't come.
4. Commissioner Kirk stated he does not completely agree with his
colleagues as he has been on the other end and often, and he is
sure the Commission will hear from Mr. Hogan, and it is one
mitigating factor, that they don't just have a letter but also have
a person testifying and addressing the issues. Sometimes you do
not have the time to prepare for public hearings and there may be
factors the Commission is unaware of. It would be nice to receive
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01.wpd 4 U / J
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
notices in advance. However, the law is very clear on this issue.
If it is submitted a minute before the hearing it is required that the
Commission address and considered the contents during the
hearing process. Therefore, he would strongly suggest the
Commission not reject it out of hand.
5. Commissioner Butler stated he did not disagree with what
Commissioner Kirk stated. What he does disagree with is the
opportunity to absorb the contents himself and he does understand
that late arrivals do create more interest.
6. Commissioner Kirk stated he concurred and it would be nice to
have the letter in advance, but again, the Commission is obligated
under the law to consider everything presented. Assistant City
Attorney Ramirez, stated that as the Commission goes through the
staff report, staff and the City Attorney's office views that the
letter does not impact the Addendum at all which obviously the
Commission has had time to review.
7. 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.
8. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Butler asked staff if this area was part of the area
where the Commission had taken a field trip. Staff stated yes and
showed the area on the map.
9. Commissioner Kirk asked where the grades were on the proposed
roadway and where the 20% slope began and ended. Senior
Engineer Steve Speer indicated on the map, the location where the
road would cut into the toe of slope. Commissioner Kirk asked if
the City had permitted road cuts in this type of slope. Staff stated
something similar at the Tradition, but did not cross a ridge line.
We have shaved across the face of slopes in various locations, the
Point Happy project is the most recent. Commissioner Kirk asked
if the right of way asphalt was noted by the grey on the map.
Staff stated yes and explained the road.
10
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01 .wpd 5
Commissioner Butler asked staff to clarify that this road was being
requested because they could not gain access through the Quarry.
Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained there were two issues in
regard to the Quarry. First was a vacation of right-of-way.
10 90
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
Officially this property had had accessed the street right of way.
There were no street improvements. Adams Street right of way
was west of this location and Avenue 58 use to extend across the
north side of the Quarry. As a condition of vacating that right of
way and taking away access to the Green property, the Quarry is
obligated to enter into an agreement with this property to provide
access. However, the two property owners have never been able
to come to terms on what the cost sharing would be. Second,
technically the Quarry is in default. They have never recorded the
street vacation. When the City approved the final tract map for
the Quarry they were again conditioned to provide access and it
was to be mutually agreed upon between the two parties. They
do have their map, but the street vacation has never been officially
recorded and therefore, officially there is still street right of way at
the Quarry passing through their golf course and several lots.
1 1 . Commissioner Kirk asked staff to explain what "default" means and
why it occurred. Staff stated that when a street right of way is
vacated, the City approves the concept with conditions and the
developer has to satisfy the conditions before they have a final
project. In this instance, the right of way is not considered
vacated until it is recorded. The Quarry has never recorded the
street vacation because they have never perfected the requirement
of providing access to the property that will be denied access.
12. Commissioner Abels asked if there was any time line to complete
the recording. Staff stated there was no timeline placed on them
to complete the requirements.
13. Commissioner Tyler asked if the City had the ability to force the
road so a road would not have to be constructed through the hill.
Staff stated this may be the opportunity to do that.
14. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was an opportunity to condition
the Quarry which is where the problem lies. Staff stated the issue
before the Commission is the road which is the applicant's
alternative as a result of not being able to reach a solution with the
Quarry. This issue of the Quarry denying access to the Green
property has come up time and time again. Staff has spoken with
the attorney for Mr. Green where the Quarry was denying access
to real estate people to show the property whereas before the
Quarry allowed this.
G:\W PDOCS\PC4-10-01.wpd
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
15. Commissioner Tyler asked if this application of the road opened
the whole Environmental Assessment process. Assistant City
Attorney John Ramirez stated that to the extent the Commission
was taking about potential impacts to habitat and the like, his
answer would be no. It would not open up the conclusions drawn
on the EIR or the Addendum. Commissioner Tyler stated the road
only encompasses a small portion of the project. Is that what they
are to limit their focus to. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez
stated that to the extent the Addendum and project before the
Commission is this road, not the alternative right of way or the
condition that was imposed on the Quarry. Commissioner Tyler
asked if any issue other than the road was open for discussion at
this time. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated no, but as
issues are discussed he can clarify whether or not it pertains to
this application.
16. Commissioner Kirk asked, somewhat in jest if there was anything
to stop someone from walking on that public right of way for
Avenue 58 even though it was within the Quarry. Staff stated the
public right of way exists, but he is sure someone would try to
stop anyone from entering. Commissioner Kirk asked legal counsel
if this was possible. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated
it was a question of right versus practicality. Certainly as a public
right of way you would have every legal right to be on that public
right of way, but obviously to the extent there are physical barriers
that would be a practical impediment.
17. Ms. Saundra Jacobs, SFC Consultants, gave a presentation on the
EIR Addendum prepared for this project.
18. Chairman Robbins asked if the Commission denied the Addendum,
it would only deny the road to the ten lots but the remainder of
the project that was previously approved could proceed. Ms.
Jacobs stated that was her understanding.
19. Commissioner Kirk questioned the Army Corp nation-wide permit
process of a tenth of an acre. Ms. Jacobs stated that was correct
based on their engineering calculations. Commissioner Kirk asked
staff if they have had any conversations with the Corp regarding
this project. Ms. Jacobs stated not with the Corp directly.
However, as it moves through the process and should the
applicant need a streambed alteration permit, the Corp will be
consulted on that process and if the Corp decides it is more than
u7g
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01 .wpd 7 1 �,
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
a tenth of an acre based on their analysis, then there will need to
be a modification in the road alignment or another alternative.
Commissioner Kirk asked based on the Supreme Court's action,
does staff believe the Corp has jurisdiction over this project. Ms.
Jacobs stated that if they find that there is a blueline stream on
the property, they will need to do a wetland analysis or wetlands
delineation to decide that and then the Corp would review that
application for a nation wide permit. Commissioner Kirk asked if
this was a navigable body of water. Ms. Jacob stated it was a
blueline on the U.S.G.A. map. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff
was familiar with the U. S. Supreme case. Ms. Jacobs stated she
was not. Commissioner Kirk stated it was his understanding that
there had been some changes in Corp policy. Has staff or legal
counsel had any interaction with them regarding this. Assistant
City Attorney John Ramirez stated he is aware of the case cited,
but is not aware of any Corp policy changes in response to the
case. He would argue that this was a case where they lack
jurisdiction. Without knowing the Corps reaction to the case he
is somewhat limited on providing information as to where they
stand on the issue. Commissioner Kirk stated this is only one of
the issues that the applicant may have many of. Ms. Jacobs
added it is the same streambed crossing that the Quarry crossed
when they developed.
20. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Marvin Roos, Director of Planning Services for
Mainiero Smith, engineer representing the project, stated they
were in agreement with most of the conditions. They would
prefer to have taken access through the Quarry, but it is difficult
to get two private parties to agree.
21. Commissioner Tyler stated this proposal is before them because no
agreement could be reached between the two private parties; has
everything possible been done in good faith to achieve this? Mr.
Roos stated Mr. Green's attorney has been diligently working on
this, but to no avail. They are before the Commission at this time
as one of the things they believe necessary to create an
atmosphere where they can reach a closure on this issue. They
need to be able to negotiate from a position of having some rights
as opposed to begging for rights. This is why they have asked for
the road. It can be done very sensitively. It is their hope to not do
the road, but if they have to, they are prepared to do so.
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01 .wpd 8
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
22. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment.
Mr. Bill Morrow, representing the Quarry, stated they have been
in every one of the discussions with Mr. Green and Mr. Schlecker
over the last seven years and at no time has any proposal ever
been made by Mr. Green to him as to what they would or would
not do with regard to getting into their property. They are
perfectly amenable and agreeable to allowing that to occur as it
part of the agreement they reached in 1993, when they first
developed the property and that has not changed. As late as last
week he made the tenth, fifteenth, or twentieth proposal to Mr.
Green and he did not respond to it. So, at no time have they made
any contradiction, action, proposal, anything whatsoever to the
Quarry and they have done it over and over again. So I think the
conversation you are hearing from these folks is really coming out
of the side of their mouth because they are agreeable to doing
this. To run a road up here and change the City's hillside
ordinance and so forth, to satisfy their needs, I think strictly has
to do with money and they are not that difficult to deal with if
they will come up with a proposal. They have not done so and he
has done so over and over again and have no comment back from
them. This has gone on for year after year after year. What the
Commission is hearing is one side of the coin, but actual side of
the coin is that they will do anything that is necessary to make
this work and they do not believe this road is the proper answer.
They have stated they are not here for the purpose of building the
road, but or the purpose of negotiating with him and that should
not have been necessary, hasn't been necessary. If they make a
proposal, he will be glad to listen to it.
23. Mr. Bob Mainiero, Mainiero Smith and Associates representing
Agiotage, stated he too has attended four meetings in Palm Desert
with representatives of the Quarry and in his opinion there was
never an effort to negotiate in good faith. Each time they left the
meeting, with the conclusion was that there was going to be a
lawsuit and Mr. Green did not want to pursue that avenue.
24. Mr. David Hogan, Center for Biological Diversity, offered an
apology for the late date of the letter. It was an honest mistake.
He had confused the date between the City Council hearing in May
with this meeting and he apologized for submitting it so late.
Obviously he would prefer they have the time to consider the
points they brought up. He would like to request time to rebuttal
to the City's attorney discussion after Mr. Hogan's presentation.
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01.wpd 9 1 j v U& 0
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
Chairman Robbins stated that was not proper. He would be
allowed an opportunity to make comments and the City would
have theirs. Mr. Hogan stated his primary purpose in appearing is
to request the Commission deny certification of the Environmental
Impact Report Addendum for the Green and to request of the
applicant submission of a subsequent EIR addressing new
information and changed circumstances regarding the Peninsular
Big Horn Sheep prior to reconsideration by this Commission and
City Council. Some of the point are that the project applicant
needs to prepare a subsequent EIR due to substantially changed
circumstances and the availability of new information. He will hit
on that information very quickly. That information includes
substantial decline in the Martinez Canyon ewe group of Big Horn
Sheep since consideration of this project in the original EIR. It also
includes a listing of the species as a Federally Endangered Species
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Since listing there was the
formation of a recovery team which came up with what's known
as an "Essential Habitat Boundary" which includes the Green
property in its entirety. The term "essential' relates to basically all
habitat which is considered necessary for the survival and recovery
of the species. That is why the recovery team developed the term
and map that included essential habitat on the Green project as
well as obviously elsewhere throughout the range of the species.
The last point he would like to make on new information is that
there has been a major comprehensive study on the effects of
urbanization on Peninsula Big Horn Sheep produced by the Big
Horn Institute and that contains a lot of new data about the
effects, not only direct impacts from development, but the effects
from lighting, noise, landscaping, all these things basically called
edufacts on Big Horn Sheep populations and unfortunately are
negative. All this information, the decline of the ewe group,
decline of the Peninsula Big Horn Sheep numbers throughout the
species range, Federal listing and the urbanization study are clearly
changed circumstances. Federal listing of the Peninsula Big Horn
Sheep as an endangered species also triggered a mandatory finding
of significance not present during the CEQA review process.
According to the case law right now, regardless of what is on the
table tonight, the City has the obligation to consider any new
information relating to this project and go back and require a
subsequent EIR if that information has become available and has
he has said it has become available. The last point is that there
were many, many points made by the Department of Fish and
Game on this project back on when they commented back in
1995. They commented both on the draft EIR as well as the Final
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01 .wpd 10
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
EIR and found there was significant flaws in those documents and
those documents did not respond adequately to those comments.
That is another reason they would ask that this be revisited today
Regarding the Corp jurisdiction issue, there has been no new
regulations in response to the Supreme Court decision. The Salton
Sea is a navigable body of water. This is a tributary to the Salton
Sea Clean Water Act which places Corp jurisdiction over all waters
of the U.S. which are navigable and tributaries to navigable waters
in the U.S. is his understanding. The Corp jurisdiction really has
nothing to do with CEQA responsibility here to go back and do a
subsequent Environmental Impact Report because they are
completely separate processes. Corp jurisdiction falls under the
Clean Water Act and this is a CEQA issue that is being considered
now. There was also the assertion made that mitigation addresses
all the new information that has come up since 1995.
Unfortunately, as indicated by Fish and Game and in their
comment letter, there has never been any release of the specifics
of that mitigation. There is going to be what is called a "Habitat
Management Plan", but Fish and Game pointed out in their
comment letters, and he reiterates that tonight, that that plan was
never presented for public review and comment and without that
they do not know if that plan is going to be adequate to mitigate
impacts to the sheep and that is probably one of the most
important reasons for revisiting this. Ultimately, this project can
proceed but it is going to be how the impacts of this project are
mitigated, especially those edge -effects and the way light,
increased human presents, as well as whether or not there is going
to be any compensation for the direct loss of habitat.
25. Commissioner Tyler stated there was an article in the local
newspaper stating how happy everyone was that the Big Horn
Sheep were alive and well and thriving and had more Iambs this
season than ever before: How does that equate to the picture he
is painting here. Mr. Hogan stated he has not seen the article, but
there certainly are not more Iambs than there ever were before.
The sheep have undergone a precipitous decline since 1973 when
it was originally listed under Fish and Game Code. There has been
fluctuation in population numbers, but the overall trend has been
downward. In the early 1990's was when there was the most
significant decline and that was when the Martinez Canyon ewe
group, which is found basically south of Highway 74 in the
southern Santa Rosa Mountains took the biggest hit and that
population has not recovered and this is based on a conversation
G:\W PDOCS\PC4-10-01 . wpd
ti � 11
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
he had today with Jim DeForge at the Big Horn Institute.
Commissioner Tyler asked if his organization was publicly funded
or private. Mr. Hogan stated they were a nonprofit private
conservation organization endangered species advocacy habitat
protection. It is membership funded as well as from foundations.
26. Commissioner Kirk asked if any further information had been
received from Fish and Game relating to the Addendum. Ms.
Jacobs stated yes, they reviewed and concurred with the
Addendum and had comment and that was the mitigation measure
concerning the lake and streambed alteration permit.
Commissioner Kirk stated Mr. Hogan indicated that going back to
the 1995 letter which did express some concerns regarding the
commitment or lack thereof of mitigation measures, have they
repeated those concerns. Ms. Jacobs stated not during the course
of this Addendum EIR. Any of the original concerns dealt with the
Travertine property and how close it was to the Martinez Rock
Slide south of it. The Habitat Management Plan is still a
requirement for the project, but has not been prepared yet and any
and all information that is available for the consultant who
eventually prepares it will be made available. Keep in mind it is the
applicant of the project who is responsible for that preparation.
The City is not required to prepare it. Commissioner Kirk asked if
there was any requirement for Fish and Game or other agency
oversite to the substance of the Habitat Management Plan.
Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated Fish and Game has to
approve the Habitat Management Plan. Commissioner Kirk asked
if that was for both specific Plans. Staff stated yes and there is
an outline as to what is to be contained within the Management
Plan and that outline came from Fish and Game. Commissioner
Kirk stated that presumably if the Department of Fish and Game
had any concerns about the details or lack thereof, of mitigation
measures, they could address them through the Habitat
Management Plan and/or streambed alteration permit process.
Staff stated yes and this Habitat Management Plan has to be
approved by Fish and Game prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Mr. Hogan stated this is a subject of significant confusion because
Fish and Game when they do the streambed alternation permit also
has to also do the CEQA analysis. He is very confused about the
process and has a feeling that they are more dropping the ball than
agreeing actually to what is going on given their lack of staffing.
His concern is that they will come in two months from now and
11
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01.wpd
>2 - U83
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
say wait, wait, wait, we have these concerns and we have to do
a CEQA analysis and it is their problem, but that is something that
there would be no streambed alteration permit until CEQA was
completed.
27. Commissioner Kirk asked if the Commission could ask the two
parties to address the negotiations.
28. Chairman Robbins stated he heard two opposing positions on what
had taken place in regard to negotiations and he did not know
whether or not it would be beneficial to hear from the two parties.
29. Commissioner Kirk stated it is very confusing because one side
says specific proposals have been put on the table and the other
side stated no, perhaps they haven't. Perhaps he is confused by
the facts in this case. Mr. Bill Morrow stated he has made
proposals specifically in writing to Mr. Green on more than one
occasion and have never ever once had any response in writing or
verbally with a proposal back from him at any time. Mr. Mainiero
stated he saw one proposal early on in the process. Independently
he was asked by Mr. Green to prepare a cost estimate for what he
believed to be the improvements related to access to the ten lots
in the northwest corner and he did that. What he recalls is that
Mr. Green offered three times what he calculated and that still was
not acceptable. The proposal he saw from the Quarry had items
that did not relate to access and no agreement was ever reached.
In his opinion, as an engineer, the City should never have approved
the final map without that compensation being resolved.
Approving it and leaving it to the parties to resolve brings us here
today.
30. Mr. Jack Becker, stated he was one of the owners of the Green
property, and the thing that has motivated him most to speak was
the commentary by the party representing fish and game. As he
understands Fish and Game is a State entity, is that correct?
Chairman Robbins clarified that Mr. Hogan did not represent Fish
and Game. Mr. Becker asked if Fish and Wildlife was a Federal
agency. Chairman Robbins stated that was correct. Mr. Becker
stated he has owned the land for 20 years and envisioned what
the Quarry eventually did only they did a fantastic thing out of a
gravel pit. He envisioned a beautiful cove that he owns, a nice
beautiful golf course with very low density which has happened
o84
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-Ot .wpd
13 � � .7
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
literally everywhere. At that time there was only 100 flat acres
and they basically had a couple hundred acres of Santa Rosa
Mountains and has often wished the Quarry would buy that one
little twelve acre section and forget these problems. Years ago he
was trying to work out something to trade the Santa Rosa portion
of their half section, approximately 200 acres of Santa Rosa
Mountains, for some of the flat area that is contiguous to his land
that belongs to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Section
32 is south of his property and there is a triangular section that is
70-75 acres. In the process he got a hold of Fish and Game, Mr.
John Sorrow, who was in charge of accessing property for Fish
and Game. He had several meetings with him and they walked his
property. He was concerned about the Big Horn Sheep and all the
other biological aspects involved in a big piece of property. He
asked Mr. Sorrow if they could make a trade for the Santa Rosa
Mountains for the flat area. Mr. Sorrow stated the land belongs
to BLM and he would see what he could. He has the documents
to back up these conversations. Mr. John Sorrow sent him a
document stating that the actual property in Section 29 did not in
any way affect the Big Horn Sheep and therefore they are not
interested in acquiring the property. They were in favor of trading
those mountains and keeping them as they are, for that land. He
then contacted Ed Hasty at BLM in California, and Mr. Hasty called
him and at that time Section 32 was part of a Wilderness Proposal
and anything in that status with the Federal government can have
nothing done to it. Even though it would have been a beautiful
arrangement to trade off those mountains and let the BLM have
them and let us have the 75 acres, we would of had enough land
to have all the flat with the aesthetics of the mountains. It was a
great thought, but because of the status of Section 32 it fell by
the wayside. The point he is trying to make is that Fish and Game
said this part of the Santa Rosa Mountains have no affect on the
Big Horn Sheep. He did not hear all the dialog given by Mr.
Hogan, but If he is trying to deny this request on the basis of Big
Horn Sheep, he is trying to create a situation that has already been
resolved by virtue of his former meeting with Fish and Game. He
sat with the founders of the Quarry in make shift Council meetings
before they ever built the Quarry. He loves the Quarry, but they
did have an agreement. If they vacated Avenue 58 and Adams
Street to public streets and give them access to their 12 acres,
that was part of the agreement. He has been through the Quarry
gate a lot of times and there has been times when they have
u85
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-Ot.wpd 14
11°
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
denied him access even though the rule is they cannot deny him
access. He does not want to get into that type of hassle. What
bothers him is that the same person who built the Quarry did the
specific plan on their property. If they can't come up with the
exact figures there is something wrong somewhere. What is
wrong with allowing them to build their road.
31. There being no further public participation, Chairman Robbins
closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened
the subject to Commission discussion.
32. Commissioner Kirk stated Mr. Hogan has made some good points.
Staff and the consultant have done a good job on the Addendum,
but there have been some new issues that have cropped up. The
other consideration he has is the comment that was made that
suggested if the Commission did approve this perhaps negotiations
would speed along between the two parties. Frankly, that wasn't
a factor that he considered and maybe ought not to consider, it is
interesting that if they were to approve a freeway to get to that
site, maybe negotiations would immediately come to pass. He
does have concerns about development over the toe of the slope
and in particular over a ridge line, so the concerns raised several
years ago by the Department of Fish and Game and more recently
raised by Mr. Hogan do resinate with him. He would be interested
in hearing how the rest of the Commission feels about these
issues at the same time.
33. Commissioner Butler stated this is an issue bigger than approving
an access to ten lots. If the Commission concentrates on access
to ten lots and the toe of the slope issue, as brought up by
Commissioner Kirk, he believes they have mitigated to some
extent the issue about access to the ten lots in the path they have
chosen to access those ten lots. The overall picture is that if they
are approving the access to the ten lots, is it a negotiating tool to
sell the ten lots to the Quarry. He is uncomfortable with the
whole situation. It is not just saying yes on the basis of what we
are presented by staff, this is what we should make our decision
on. He gets conflicting messages that the owners of the Quarry
are willing to allow access to the ten lots and if this were true,
then this road would not have to go forward. He is confused.
34. Commissioner Tyler asked if the whole crux of this hearing has to
do with the road that requires the Conditional Use Permit approval.
If the CUP were denies the rest of it would be moot. Assistant
G:\W PDOCS\PC4-10-Ot .wpd
is 11" U86
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
City Attorney John Ramirez stated that was right, it is an
extension of a package of entitlements before the Commission.
The CUP is a necessary component of the road. To the extent
there is a scenario that envisions the lessening a lessening of the
grade perhaps that would ameliorate the need for a CUP, but as
proposed, a CUP is required. Commissioner Tyler asked if the CUP
was not approved the other resolutions would not be necessary.
Assistant City Attorney Ramirez stated that if the CUP were not
approved, the project would not go forward. The other approvals
to some extent, are intertwined, but to another extent they stand
on their own merit. Does the Commission want him to address
the comments made by Mr. Hogan on the EIR?
35. Chairman Robbins asked legal counsel to address the comments
made by Mr. Hogan. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated
there were three comments. One may be relevant or irrelevant,
but as a quick background, the Center for Biological Diversity filed
a lawsuit against BLM some time ago seeking to close a number
of public access trails including the Boo Hoff Trail at the north end
of the Cove. The lawsuit was slated to be settled by stipulation
by the former U.S. Attorney's office and the Center just days prior
to the prior presidential administration leaving office. A number of
affected entities in the Valley were informed of this at the 111h
hour by the local office of the BLM and filed a brief in opposition
to that stipulated settlement. Certainly the City encourages and
does in fact encourage broad public participation of a wide variety
of individuals and groups including the Center for Biological
Diversity. Given the lack of participation by the Center with
respect to other City projects for years prior, he raised the issue as
to whether or not there is some nexus with the City's brief filed in
that case which was merely five or six weeks ago and their
participation here. That aside and dealing with the legal issues in
the letter there are really two issues. The first is the original EIR
adopted in 1995 for Specific Plan. That EIR studied thoroughly the
impact to the Peninsular Big Horn Sheep and although there is
documentation throughout the EIR, Pages 3.8-5 to 3.8-10, he
thinks are particularly relevant including the finding as expressed
in the EIR that potentially impacts to Big Horn Sheep are
considered significant. This was included in the 1995 EIR. That
EIR, as the Commission knows, was adopted on the basis of
overriding considerations specifically dealing with the significant
impact to the Peninsular Big Horn Sheep. To the extent the letter
is trying to raise an issue as to the adequacy of the study, that is
time barred by Public Resources Code Section 21 167.2. Certainly
the Public Resources Code and the Guidelines make quite clear U 8 i
A, 16 c ��
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
that one is not able to reopen previously approved EIR's when
those EIRs considered the issue we have here which is the impact
to Peninsular Big Horn Sheep. With respect to the allegations in
the letter that there are changed circumstances, the City
Attorney's office has reviewed along with staff and consultants
and they believe there are no changed circumstances. The impact,
as stated earlier, was studies in the 1995 EIR. A couple cases are
relevant here, Sierra Club vs. Gilroy City Council, 1990 Court of
Appeals decision 222 Cal.App.3d30 was a case involving the
allegation that a discovery of an endangered species on a project
site years after an EIR was adopted required a new EIR as opposed
to an Addendum, and the Court rejected the Addendum on the
basis that the previously approved EIR fully studied the significant
impact to endangered species. A second case, Chaparral Greens
vs. City of Chula Vista, 1996, 50 Cal.App.4th 1134, again the
allegation that new information exists does not reopen the EIR
when the previously adopted EIR studied the impacts to species or
habitat. Significantly, the consultant recognized the trustee
agency, California Fish and Game has been working with the City
on the mitigation measures. This is the agency that is statutorily
obligated and charged with the enforcing the endangered species
act. They have worked with the City and provided their thoughts
on the Addendum and as the consultant stated earlier, the only
issue they raised was with respect to the Streambed Alteration
Permit requirement. The allegation that the 1995 letter and the
issues contained therein were not resolved is simply wrong. In the
comments received in the Response to Comments prepared in
conjunction with 1995 EIR, there is ample documentation with
respect the comments raised by the Fish and Game and responded
to by the lead agency in the EIR. And finally, he might add, in
reference to the allegation of impact and where we are with
respect to the status of Big Horn Sheep, Jim DeForge's name was
referenced with respect to the latest study, the latest newspaper
article Commissioner Tyler referred to which is April 9, 2001, the
heading is "Valley's Big Horn population is thriving". Jim DeForge
is quoted, "the numbers are up in both ranges. So to the extent
that there is an allegation of decline, this is not supported by this
study, nor is it supported in the Recovery Plan adopted by U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service. So based on our review we think the
Addendum is both adequate and appropriate.
36. Commissioner Tyler stated that if there was a written signed
agreement between the two developers stating they have been
unable to settle the issue, and the road is the only alternative, he
would feel a lot different about it. We have double talk and dialog, U 8
17
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
but no hard facts have been presented. He shares Commissioner
Kirk's concern about approving a road that goes over the toe of
slope and ridgeline. There is nothing in the CUP as written that
even limits it to a specific plan to show exactly where the road will
go. Right now he cannot endorse the CUP.
37. Commissioner Butler stated he would agree with most of what
Commissioner Tyler stated, but by the same token the
Commission is being put into a position where they are denying
access to a property owner which we have approved for the
purpose of development. It is getting to a grey area whether they
access it through Quarry or they access it through their own
property. He is uncertain whether in fact we accept the toe of
slope and access route they have chose, but he does not know if
the Commission can stop them from accessing their own property.
He does not disagree with the points made, but with all other
issues aside, the Commission does have to deal with the fact that
this gentleman has the right to get to his ten lots. From that
standpoint the Commission has to consider it and not just say no
that CUP will not allow it. Once we say no, we have isolated his
ten lots and if he does not settle with the Quarry, we are creating
a problem.
38. Commissioner Tyler stated the Commission has considered it on
various occasions in the past and the City Council has considered
it. It is not a new issue. It has been around for many years.
39, Commissioner Kirk stated this issue does arise if we do have to
allow some sort of development if that is the only development
allowed. However, it is his understanding that because the Green
Specific Plan includes lots of other developable area, this would
not be considered a taking, at least not under the current
interpretation of the law, because there is other land that can be
developed. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated yes, and
we said we have vision access to prior processes which makes it
a little different. He would generally agree. Commissioner Kirk
stated he is concerned about the process at this meeting. The
Commission has heard him address issues of signage, for example,
chain stores versus the small businesses, and we have something
similar here and it just came up in terms of the process. When
staff receives correspondence it is generally included in the agenda
packet and if those letters address issues they generally address
those in the staff report. The Commission received a letter, at the
last minutes, from the Center for Biological Diversity and it is an
organization he is somewhat familiar with and for the most part, U 8 9
18
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
generally do not agree with their tactics or substance of their
issues; personally or politically. At the same time he is really
concerned about the process. Mr. Hogan asked if he could rebut
the likely comments made by our City Attorney. We held off on
the City Attorney comments until after the public participation
portion of the hearing and to him that is wrong. He finds that
disagreeable, unfair, and if City staff did that on every letter that
came in they would have a lot of unhappy residents and justifiably
so. The Assistant City Attorney did a fine job of rebutting the
issues and was very articulate and he had a very well prepared
rebuttal to Mr. Hogan's points and that should have been made in
the staff report to give Mr. Hogan a chance to address those
issues. Therefore, he has a real concern about this and he hopes
this does not happen in the future. He finds it certainly
inappropriate at the best.
40. Commissioner Abels stated there was no time for this to have
been included in the staff report.
41. Commissioner Kirk stated he agreed but yet the City Attorney had
time to prepare a well planned verbal response that should have
been included in the staff report to give to those in the public a
chance to rebut or address those issues. Assistant City Attorney
John Ramirez stated they could reopen the public participation of
the hearing if the Commission wanted to provide for nominal
rebuttal time. Commissioner Kirk stated he has significant
concerns. He does not think that is fair. I do not think the
Commission should do that to people who go out of their way to
come to the public hearing and don't have a chance to address the
issue. He would leave it up to the Chair as to whether he would
reopen the public hearing.
42. Chairman Robbins stated everyone has been focusing on the EIR
portion and no one has made any comment on the Specific Plan or
whether any of the addendum or changes to the Specific Plan are
appropriate and he would like to say that we also need to look at
the Specific Plan changes and one of the changes he has found
significant is that it does not address landscape guidelines or any
other issues. If they get the point of approving this project, he
would like to add some conditions that they develop landscape
guidelines that conform with the City's landscape ordinance. He
has a questioned as to whether approving the Addendum opens
the 30-day review process for the entire EIR to challenge.
Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated he does not know the
statue as to challenging the Addendum. It perhaps is 30 days, but U 9 0
r .\wpnocs\Pc4-10-01 .wod
19
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
certainly it does not open up a challenge to the previously adopted
EIR. Chairman Robbins stated his concern was that by approving
the road be reopening the EIR for challenge. Assistant City
Attorney John Ramirez stated pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21167.2 and others perhaps, it is quite clear that the
previously EIR is time barred from subsequent challenges.
Chairman Robbins clarified that only the relevant issues to the
Addendum could be challenged. Assistant City Attorney John
Ramirez stated the question is that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
is the Addendum a permissible way to go under CEQA. Chairman
Robbins stated it has been intimated by one side or the other that
the Quarry is not cooperating with this whole process and there is
a whole issue with the Quarry with public right of way going
through their golf course and several of their lots. Is it at the
discretion of the Commission that if a future request came through
for the Quarry for a approval of something, that the Commission
could deny any future approvals on the Quarry until matters of
right of way, vacation, and access were resolved. Assistant City
Attorney John Ramirez stated he was hesitate to answer this in
the absence of a specific project or scenario. Certainly, he would
recommend that the Commission look at this project in isolation.
Obviously, there is background that is relevant, but he is
uncomfortable answering as to what future options there are to
condition the Quarry. As he understands the previous condition,
it is something akin to agreeing to agree and obviously by all
accounts, has not happened yet. Chairman Robbins stated Mr.
Hogan made some comments relative to what essential habitat is
and he would like to comment that to his understanding, essential
habitat has absolutely no legal standing under the law and it was
a term developed specifically and exclusively for use in the Big
Horn Sheep. The law has critical habitat which has since been
established which has a different boundary than the essential
habitat and the essential habitat was something made up for the
purposes of the Big Horn Sheep Recovery Plan. He also has had
the opportunity to discuss Big Horn Sheep issues with Fish and
Wildlife personnel and have discussed Big Horn Sheep close to this
property and in all his discussions, the Green property was not of
concern with Fish and Wildlife while the Travertine was of grave
concern to Fish and Wildlife. The last issue he would like to raise
is that he would like to apologize to Commissioner Kirk and the
other Commissioners, after listening he agrees with Commissioner
Kirk and should have conducted the meeting differently and that
would have been the proper way to do it.
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01 .wpd 20
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
43, Commissioner Kirk stated he had a creative or foolish suggestion.
As pointed out, the Commission is in a difficult position. He would
therefore, suggested continuing this and ask the parties to work
together on the access issue with a neutral third party present. He
would then like to see them come back with an arbitrator or City
Attorney's third party assessment and perhaps with some support
from the City Engineer on the value of the access and appropriate
maintenance cost and the like. That could influence their decision
in the future. If they do not do this at this stage, he agrees with
Commission Tyler that he would not be comfortable with the
application. There are too many questions that have been raised
and he would vote against it at this stage.
44. Commissioner Abels concurred and he would like to make a
motion that this be continued to another date that would be
agreeable with the two parties concerned so they can resolve this
issue.
45. Chairman Robbins asked the Assistant City Attorney if the
Commission could make such a motion. Assistant City Attorney
John Ramirez stated they can vote to continue the hearing and
provide guidance as to what the Commission wants brought back.
46. Commissioner Tyler stated he seconded the motion
47. Commissioner Butler asked if they decided to vote at this meeting,
it was obvious that they would unanimously deny this effort, and
if it moved on to the City Council for their decision, are they
pushing the applicant to meet and mediate with their neighbor? By
going this way they are opening the time frame to allow them to
resolve the issue.
48. Commissioner Kirk stated he would like to ask the applicant and
he is not sure it is a unanimous disapproval and he is not sure if
they came back, based on a neutral parties assessment, how he
or others would vote. He asked the two parties for their opinion.
Mr. Bob Mainiero asked the Commission wanted it back or would
they prefer to go forward. Discussion followed regarding the
options.
Chairman Robbins recessed the meeting at 8:55 p.m. and reconvened at 9:04 p.m.
49. Chairman Robbins asked Mr.
Mr. Mainiero stated that in
cooperation they are willing
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01.wpd 21
Mainiero what they would prefer.
the interest of good faith and
to try negotiations. Mr. Morrow F U 9
Planning Commission Minutes
April 10, 2001
stated he made a proposal to Mr. Green just last week which was
not responded. He would be glad to meet with Mr. Green at any
time with a 24-hour notice. He has no interest in meeting with an
engineer or attorney. He would like to meet with the principal, the
person who can make the decision. If he would like to do that he
would be more than pleased to do that. If the Commission would
like a referee in the room to not necessarily negotiate, but to hear
both sides and make suggestions, that would be fine. He is
available at any time as he has been for the last seven years.
50. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Abets to continue this item to May 8, 2001.
Unanimously approved.
D. Zoning Code Amendment 2000-068; a request of the City for an
Amendment to Section 13.20.115 - Amending Maps, of the Municipal
Code to allow approval of final maps by the Community Development
Director.
1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked what initiated this. Staff stated map
changes were requested to be made by the applicant under a lot
line adjustment. This does not allow for a public hearing. Senior
Engineer Steve Speer explained that an amending map is done
when there is a map recorded and you want to change the
configuration. There are two levels of amending maps. If there is
something technically wrong, it is doe at the staff level. If there
is a reconfiguring of the lots it has to go to a public hearing and in
the amending map process you can only focus on the issues of
what is being done to the map. You can no longer condition the
map. If you do not like what they are doing you can deny the map
and in that case the applicant could go back through the tentative
tract map processing process and then conditions could be added.
Because it is limited only to the changes that are being made to
the map, and we do want some type of public hearing process,
22 u 9 3
G:\WPDOCS\PC4-10-01 .wpd �_
� Attachment 2
e94
Attachment 3
Nb'"ld �I�I��dB N��kiO ��• "'"''"' •"•
oxuuw wn i �..�mxTAD
Sn��l JNI 'SSJYIJOSSY ONY
E }!'4!'4X:q
0
Op0
0
0 W 0
FNF-
000
JJJ
ZZZ
LLU.L
NU)N
O Q 0 I-
CD060
p
f
�ZZ�
D��
N��N
J Attachment 4Wo
z Nli
=Z
'k
"=� < ( _
, ,[1'GL[2 i� M fl O6lO
at
fill .1i
Allt
• R 9 R` Jury � R '' 4
<g
a
Center for Biological Diversity
Attachment 5
VIA FACSIMILE AND HAND DELIVERY
April 10, 2001
City of La Quinta Planning Commission
c/o Christine Di Iorio, Acting Community Development Director
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta CA 92253
Re: Environmental Impact Report (94-287) Addendum for "The Green"
Honorable Commissioners and Ms. Di Iorio:
Thank you for this opportunity to provide comments on the Addendum to Environmental
Impact Report (94-287) for "The Green" development project in the City of La Quinta. The purpose
of this letter is to request that the Planning Commission deny certification of the addendum, and to
require submission of a subsequent EIR addressing new information and changed circumstances
regarding the Peninsular bighorn sheep prior to reconsideration. New information and changed
circumstances reveal that the project will significantly harm the endangered Peninsular bighorn sheep
to an extent not known or considered during the course of previous California Environmental Quality
Act analysis.
I. The project applicant must prepare a subsequent EIR due to substantially changed
circumstances and availability of new information
Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code sets forth three circumstances which trigger the
need for preparation of a subsequent environmental impact report: (1) substantial changes are
proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the environmental impact report;
Tucson • Phoenix • San Diego • silver City • Berkeley • Portland • Shaw Island
Soudhem California Office • PO Box 628 • Sag YsaK CA - W70
T: (160) 7829244 • F: (I60) 782M301 J. I I U 9
ww b dopjcaldive WIMR
Request for subsequent EIR for "The Green" project
April 10, 2001
Page 2
(2) substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which a project is being
undertaken which will require major revisions in the environmental impact report; and (3) new
information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the environmental
impact report was certified as complete, becomes available. In this instance, the last two triggering
conditions apply, and a subsequent environmental impact report must be prepared before approval
of The Green project.
The EIR Addendum now under consideration by the Planning Commission wholly fails to
address changed circumstances and new information regarding impacts to bighorn which will result
from The Green project. According to CEQA Guidelines' section 15164(a): "The lead agency or a
responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or
additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation
of a subsequent EIR have occurred." See CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a), emphasis added.
Here it is clear that The Green project will trigger the second two conditions described in Public
Resources Code § 21166, thereby requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR. 14 Cal. Code Regs.
§ 15162.2
Several substantial changes have occurred with regard to circumstances surrounding The
Green project. New information is also available regarding the effects of the project on Peninsular
bighorn sheep. First, the Martinez Canyon bighorn ewe group population has declined significantly
since The Green project EIR was approved in 1995. This ewe group lives in and around The Green
project site. Bighorn in the Santa Rosa Mountains east of Highway 74 declined by roughly 42%
between 1996 and 1998, from 83 down to 48 sheep.;
These declines correspond with an overall population decline throughout the U.S. which
triggered the federal listing of the Peninsular bighorn sheep as an endangered species on March 18,
1998. This listing occurred after The Green EIR was approved in 1995.
Since federal listing, a recovery team was established and has prepared a recovery plan for
the Peninsular bighorn. One of the first tasks accomplished by the recovery team was identification
of all Peninsular bighorn habitat considered by recovery team experts to be essential for the
' CEQA guidelines are found in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, § 15000 et seq.
'- A supplemental EIR is appropriate when only minor changes or additions are necessary to make
the original EIR adequate. See 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15163(a).
3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Recovery plan for bighorn sheep in the Peninsular Ranges,
California.
Request for subsequent EIR for "The Green" proiect
April 10, 2001
Page 3
conservation O.e. survival and recovery) of the species. This essential habitat is identified in the final
recovery plan and includes all part of The Green project. Recovery plan at page 74.
A major comprehensive study on the effects of urbanization on Peninsular bighom sheep has
also been completed since approval of The Green EIR.4 Prior to completion of this study, urban
effects on the Peninsular bighom sheep were less certain. However, the 1998 study provided
quantifiable data of adverse impacts that can be expected from urban projects such as The Green.
The study focused on the harmful effects of urbanization on a ewe group in the northern Santa Rosa
Mountains. The study found that between 1991 through 1996, 11 bighom mortalities were directly
caused by urbanization (5 struck by automobiles, 5 ingested toxic exotic plants, and 1 was strangled
in a fence). Seven additional bighorn were documented in a compromised condition as a result of
interactions with urbanization (4 struck by automobiles, 3 with heavy parasite infections). This study
provides substantial new information regarding the likely negative effects of The Green project that
was unavailable during prior environmental review. This information must be considered fully in a
subsequent or supplemental EIR.
All of this information — decline of the Martinez Canyon ewe group, decline in Peninsular
bighorn sheep numbers throughout the species' range, federal listing as an endangered species,
identification of "essential" Peninsular bighorn habitat on The Green project site and the effects of
urbanization study — are clearly changed circumstances and new information that require substantial
revisions to the previous EIR. These substantial revisions clearly cannot be addressed in an EIR
Addendum. For thee reasons, a subsequent EIR must be prepared.
II Federal listing of the Peninsular bighorn as endangered triggered a mandatory finding of
significance requirement not present dung the previous CEQA review
Section 15065 ofthe CEQA Guidelines, entitled Mandatory Findings of Significance, provides
in pertinent part that:
"A lead agency shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the
environment and thereby require an EIR to be prepared for the project where any one
of the following conditions occur:
DeForge, J.R. and S.D. Osterman. 1998. The effects of urbanization on a population of desert
bighom sheep. A summary of the results of this study is attached, and the study hereby incorporated by
reference. U 9 9
Y
Request for subsequent EIR for "The Green" project
April 10, 2001
Page 4
(a) The project has the potential to ... reduce the number or restrict the range of
an endangered, rare or threatened species ...."
The plain, unqualified language of Section 15065 requires that any restriction of the range of an
"endangered" species rises to the level of significant impact. Unlike several other impacts listed in
Section 15065(a) which do not involve endangered species, impacts that have the potential to reduce
the range of an endangered species are considered significant without a showing of "substantial"
restriction of range or complete "elimination" of the species.
In this instance, The Green project is poised to further reduce and restrict the range of the
endangered Peninsular bighorn sheep by destroying approximately 94 acres of essential bighorn
habitat and indirectly affecting a much greater area through noise, lighting and other impacts
associated with a greatly increased human presence. This further reduction of the endangered
bighorn's range triggers Section 15065's mandatory requirement for a finding of significance. This
in turn renders totally inadequate The Green EIR Addendum.
The mandatory finding of significance is a new circumstance that was not in existence during
the previous review because the Peninsular bighorn was not yet a federally listed endangered species.'
The mandatory finding of significance sets into play a completely new level of environmental review
that must be conducted before a proposed project can be considered for approval. This includes an
analysis of the project in light of the acknowledged significant impact to determine whether there are
feasible alternatives or mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the impact to a level of insignificance.
This analysis can only be accomplished through preparation of a subsequent EIR which is subjected
to review and comment by the public and scientific community and adoption of findings appropriate
for projects with significant impacts.
Further, although Section 15065 refers to findings requiring preparation of an EM it applies
equally to the analysis done when considering whether a subsequent E1R is required. This is made
clear in the discussion section following the Guideline which reads, in pertinent part:
' The Peninsular bighorn sheep was listed as a state threatened species; however, during the time
periods in which the previous environmental review for The Green project was conducted, the section's
mandatory requirements did not apply to restriction of a threatened species' range. Section 15065(a) was
not amended until December 1998 to include restricting the range of a "threatened" species as a triggering
event.
`- 133 100
Request for subsequent EIR for "The Green" project
April 10, 2001
Page 5
"This section provides additional explanation of the mandatory findings of significance
required by the Legislature in [Public Resources Code] section 21083. These
mandatory findings control not only the decision of whether to prepare an EIR but
also the identification of effects to be analyzed in depth in the EM the requirement
to make detailed findings on the feasibility of alternatives or mitigation measures to
reduce or avoid the significant effects and when found to be feasible, the making of
changes in the project to lessen the adverse environmental impacts. This section is
necessary to insure that public agencies follow the concerns of the Legislature in
determining that certain effects shall be found significant and then take the actions at
the different stages of the process that are required with significant effects."
(emphasis added.)
Facts similar to those presented in this instance were considered in Mira Monte Homeowners'
Association v County of Ventura (1985) 165 Cal.App.3d 357, 212 Cal.Rptr. 127, which addressed
the applicability of the mandatory findings of significance to a project for which an EIR had already
been prepared. The issue was a change in circumstance that revealed further intrusion into wetlands
occupied by rare plant species. Id. at 364. Addressing the significance of this new information, the
Court found the following:
Significant effect on the environment means a substantial, or potentially substantial,
adverse change in the environment (§ 21068). The CEQA Guidelines require a
mandatory finding of significance where, inter alia, the project "... has the potential
to ... threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, [or] reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant ..." (Guidelines § 15065).
Id. at 363. Although the County of Ventura had adopted a series of mitigation measures it claimed
would reduce the new impact to a level of insignificance, the Court of Appeal was unpersuaded and
found that the new significant impact triggered the need for a subsequent or supplemental EIR. Once
the facts establish that the range of an endangered species was reduced, the duty to find significance
was no longer discretionary, and opinions by experts that the impact is not significant were irrelevant
to the legal question. Id. at 364 fn.10. See also Los Angeles Unified School District v City of Los
Angeles (1997) 58 Cal.AppAth 1019, 1024, fn. 6. Mira Monte makes clear that the mandatory
findings of significance apply to all stages of the EIR preparation and consideration, including post-
EIR stages where new information is discovered.
Request for subsequent EIR for "The Green" proiect
April 10, 2001
Page 6
III. A subsequent EIR is required for The Green proiect because several California Department
of Fish and Game concerns have never been addressed
The California Department of Fish and Game sent two letters to the City of La Quinta
regarding The Green draft EIR.' These letters presented significant concerns regarding the failure
of the EIR to address project impacts to the bighorn. The City and project applicant have never
adequately responded, and these concerns must now be addressed in an subsequent EIR. Major
concerns expressed by Fish and Game include, among others,
• The Green EIR does not adequately consider the importance of the project site as occupied
bighorn habitat;
The Green FIR does not mitigate for significant project impacts to bighorn occupying the
project site and adjacent Bureau of Land Management and California Department of Fish and
Game lands,
CEQA Guidelines do not recognize plans as mitigation. The proposed Habitat Management
Plan must be prepared as part of a draft subsequent EIR and distributed with that document
for public review,
The FIR does not adequately address direct, indirect and cumulative effects of The Green
project on the bighorn;
Mitigation measures in the EIR fail to include compensation for bighorn sheep habitat losses;
• The project applicant must obtain take authorization from the Department of Fish and Game
for the bighorn,
c February 28, 1995 letter from Patricia Wolfe, California Department of Fish and Game to Jerry
Herman, City of La Quinta regarding Draft Environmental Impact Report for Travertine and Green
Specific Plan SCH 94112047, Riverside County. This letter is available in La Quinta files and is hereby
incorporated by reference.
Also, May 1, 1995 letter from Patricia Wolf to Jerry Herman regarding Final Environmental
Impact Report for Travertine and Green Specific Plan SCH 94112047, Riverside County. This letter is
apparently not contained in the City's files according to communications with planner Greg Trousdell.
This letter is attached and hereby incorporated by reference.
13 5� 102
Request for subsequent EIR for "The Green" oroiect
April 10, 2001
Page 7
The-EIR provides no supporting rationale for its conclusion that impacts to bighorn can or
will be reduced to a level of insignificance.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments. I will be available at the Planning
Commission meeting this evening, or please contact me at 760 782-9244 if you have any questions
regarding these comments.
Sincerely,
David Hogan
cc: Curt Taucher, Regional Manager, California Department of Fish and Game
13103
Effects of urbanization on desert bighorn. James R. DeForge and Stacey D. Ostermann.
DEFORGE, JAMES R., and STACEY D. OSTERMANN. Effects of urbanization on a
population of desert bighorn sheep. Bighorn Institute, P. O. Box 262, Palm Desert, CA 92261
Peninsular desert bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis cremnobates) in the United States declined
>70% in the past two decades, to approximately 280 adults in 1996. Peninsular bighorn are
listed as threatened by the State of California and endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. In the northern Santa Rosa Mountains (NSRM) of California, Peninsular bighorn often
use urban residential areas constructed within bighorn habitat. We studied cause -specific
mortality of radio -collared bighorn in the NSRM between 1991-1996 and documented 11
mortalities directly caused by urbanization (5 automobile collisions, 5 exotic plant poisonings,
and 1 fence strangulation). Urbanization accounted for 34% (11/32) of the adult bighorn
mortalities; remaining mortalities were attributed to predation (28%), disease (3%), and unknown
causes (34%). Indirect effects of urbanization on bighorn included 4 injured from automobile
collisions and 3 with clinical signs of parasite infection. Strongyle parasites are rare in desert
ecosystems, but Strongyle ova or larvae were found in 86% (25/28) of the bighorn tested.
Altered habitat use and behavior of bighorn sheep using urban areas appeared to contribute to the
chronic low lamb recruitment recorded for this population. We recommend constructing a fence
along the urban -mountain interface to exclude bighorn sheep from urban areas in the NSRM.
TWS98 137
37 104
(15%�A/15 THU Ot 52 FAA RJ001
rr
STATE Oe CALIFORNLA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY YETE WASON, G•WMer
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
330 GOEOEN SHORE, SLITS 30
LONG SEACK CA 90801 0
(310) 590.5113 . May 1, 1935
Mr. Jerry Herman
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Dear Mr. Herman:
Final Environmental Impact Report
Travertine and Green Specific Plan
SCH 94112047, Riverside County
The Department of Fish and Came (Department) has reviewed the above -
referenced document relative to its affects or biological resources. The
Department believes that the FEIR has failed :o respond to the issues we have
raised. Many of the comments within the FEIR are conclusionary relying on
unsubstantiated opinion, or are non -responsive in nature. The FEIR operates on the
assumption that future plans can successfull�' mitigate project related impacts.
The FEIR also erroneously assumes that impacts to Peninsular bighorn sheep (Ovis
canadensis cremnobates), a state -listed threatened species, have been mitigated to
a level of less than significant. It is the Department's determination that proposed
mitigation measures are inadequate and will need modification.
Responses to our comments In the FEIR imply that project related impacts to
Peninsular bighorn sheep were mitigated in an Environmental Assessment (EA)
prepared by the Bureau of Land Management (ELM) for a land exchange. The FEIR
states that "The EA conclusions were utilized extensively in preparation of the
Travertine and Green Specific Plan Draft EIR." Neither the EA nor its
accompanying biological report were provided in the DEIR, technical appendices,
FEIR or anywhere else in the administrative record. Department staff have
acquired these documents and our review has revealed inconsistencies with the
FEIR's interpretation of the EA and erroneous assumptions related to bighorn sheep
management..
The EA prepared by ELM is riot a surrogate for the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) process. Furthermore, there is no formal recognition in the EA
that the land exchange was mitigation for development. To the contrary, in the EA
Mitigation Measures section on Page 18, it states;
".., developments must develop in accordance with an approved Specific
plan after the approval of an EIR. Impacts to the biological resources present on
the selected public land would be addressed in this FIR. "
1.3S Yv5
05/28!1S THU 05:56 FAY
rdooz.
Mr. Jerry Herman
May 1, 1995
Page Two
The Era goes on to state, in the Recommendation/Rationale section, that the lands
to be exchanged are approximately equal in ralue. The focus of the EA is on the
land exchange itself, not on the appropriateness of the development.
An additional inaccurate inference r-; thet the land exchange provided habitat
for Peninsular bighorn sheep in the San Jacinto Mountains. Two of the four
sections exchanged by the property owner are outside of the range of Peninsular
bighorn sheep in the San Jacinto Mountains (Sec 5, & 29, TSS, R4E). The other
two sections (21 & 27, TSS, R4E) are dominated ivith vegetation which does not
contribute to bighorn sheep habitat. On page 12 of the EA in the Biological
Resources section it states;
"At elevations above approxiiately 3600 feet on the offered private land,
the transition to pinyon juniper habitat occurs".
The F:A continues, describing pinyon -juniper rind chaparral habitat which Is not
suitable habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep, out is the predominant vegetation on
all four sections.
A fifth section of land (Sec. 33) proviously owned by the Nature
Conservancy is situated within bighorn sheo habitat in the Santa Rosa Mountains.
Unfortunately, this section of land is traversed by the Dunn Road which was
protected by an easement in the exchange. The presence of this road severely
limits the Department's ability to manage bighorn sheep on the property in
perpetuity. This road has contributed to poaching, OHV uses and trespass by
recreationists into sheep habitat at sensitive times of the year. Land use under the
current scenario does not provide an opportunity for acceptable management.
The FEIR assumes that impacts to sensitive wildlife resources will be
mitigated through unrealized planning effore. Plans reported to provide mitigation
included a "bighorn sheep habitat management plan" and the "Coachella Valley
Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan" (c'11M5HCP). Neither of these plans have
been described in detail nor have they beer! implemented. The CVMSHCP is in the
early stages of inception' and specific mitigation measures have yet to be
described. Preliminary mitigation elements to be included in a sheep plan have
been offered but they are vague and are not supported by substantial evidence in
the record.
The Department requested that mitigation measures for bighorn sheep be
described In sufficient detail and resolution to satisfy requirements for a California
Endangered Species Act -Memorandum of l!nderstanding and that buffers be
incorporated and designed in consultation with the Department. The DEIR stated
133 YU0
US/25/15 Ttid 05:54 F.AS
Z005
Mr. Jerry Herman
Me 1, 1995
Page Three
that buffers would be provided tut failed tc provide a description. The current
proposed buffer in the FEIR is s.ibstantially less than the minimum figure provided
by the Department and significantly deviates from the buffers associated with the
development example given in the biological technical report. Buffers at the
development mentioned in the report viere for 400 m (1312 ft) of natural
landscape. The Department provide: the figire of 184.E m (605 ft) as a minimal
distance. The FEIR, however, dtrscribes a 9' .4 m (300 ft) buffer encumbered with
recreational development in the form of 3 go f course.
The buffer width described in the FEIF would not be acceptable to the
Department. Its proposed configuration cannot be substantiated by any evidence
in the record. In spite of our earlier con rents on the DEIR, the FEIR continues to
rely on the personal opinions of the consulting biologist as substantial evidence.
The reputed notoriety of a consulting biologist is not a substitute for substantial
evidence. The record does not contain any factual basis or reasonable
assumptions predicated on facts to upport his contentions. Opinions and
assertions presented in the biological report prepared for the ELM EA are also
similarly deficient. The CEOA requires that expert testimony and opinion be
supported by substantial evidence.
The cumulative effects analysis remains deficient. The FEIR response to
comments on issues raised in the Depagmerit's letter of February 28, 1995, is
unresponsive in nature on this issue. The FEIR compares cumulative effects with
gew?ral plans for the county and the city, community plans and a street alignment
plan, A comparison of cumulative effects on Peninsular bighorn sheep and the
Santa Rosa Mountains was not providea. F�-cent court decisions have held that an
EIR must compare the impacts of the projec- with the actual environment upon
which the proposal will operate and not wits existing plans.
Response to the Departmen.'s commenrs on alternatives analysis is also
unsatisfactory. CEQA Guidelines, § 16126 nacluires that discussions of
alternatives, "...focus on alternatives cspabl.? or' eliminating any significant adverse
environmental effects or reducing there to a level of insignificance, even if these
alternatives would impede to some degree tl.o attainment of the project objectives,
or would be more costly. " Since the Project Objectives section of the DEIR did not
specify the proposed location, an off-srte alt-rnative should have been considered.
An EIR is not a document of advocazy but of information. A modification of the
preferred alternative or an off -site alternative: could have provided an
environmentally superior alternative. In the Department's view, the DEIR and FEIR
have not provided sufficient discussion of the merits of the alternatives that would
allow for informed decision making by the City Council.
1 Y�) IU
O5!28/ 15 THU 05:54 FAX
Mr. Jerry Herman
May 1, 1995
Page Four
To summarize the Department's Invoivement, staff first apoke with the
biological consultants in May and urgfrd them to participate in a pre -project
planning meeting to discuss these issues. The Department provided detailed
scoping comments at the Notice of Prepararion stage on December 2, 1994. The
Department also invited the consultant to a pre -project planning meeting on
February 10, 1995 to discuss issues; of concern. Consultants initiated a meeting
with the Department on April 27, 1995 to discuss issues we had raised In our
correspondence and at a previous rneetirg, Despite the Department's efforts to
resolve oese issues the necessary mitig_ition is still lacking in the FEIR. The
Department, therefore, requests that the EIR not be certified until a supplement
can be prepared addressing wildlife resource issues.
In conclusion, the Department reiturate:l its earlier comments and request that
approp, iate mitigation and com,jensaJorn be provide for the significant issues we
have raised. As always, if yoL have any qu.stions, please contact Mr. Kevin -Barry
Brennan, Associate Wildlife Eiologist, at'9C9) 659-2641 or Ms. Lilia I. Martinez,
Environmental Specialist III, at {310) 59C•48O.
Srice reI,/,
Pa .ricia 'Woli
Acting Regional ManagHr
Region 5
cc; See attached list
'- 1�1 108
05 28, 15�TH , 03:55 FAA �j0U5
Mr. Jerry Herman
May 1, 1995
Page Five
cc: Mr. Kevin -Barry Brennan
Department of Fish and Game
Idyllwild, California
Ms. Lilia I. Martinez
Department of Fish and Game
Long Beach, California
Mr. Jim Davis
Department of Fish and Game
Sugarloaf, California
Mr. Glenn Black
Department of Fish and Game
Chino, California
Ms. Dee Sudduth
Department of Fish and Game
Jamul, California
Mr. Frank Hoover
Department of Fish and Game
Chino, California
Mr. Jeff Lovich
NBS
c/o Bureau of Land Management
Palm Springs, California
Ms.Ann Kreager
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Carlsbad, California
Ms, Julia Dugan
Bureau of Land Management
Palm Springs, California
PH #B
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: MAY 8, 2001
CASE NOS.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-059
REQUEST: INSTALLATION OF TELECOMMUNICATION APPARATUS
LOCATED ON AN EXISTING 100 FOOT HIGH TOWER
LOCATION: 81600 AVENUE 58
APPLICANT: SPRINT PCS
PROPERTY OWNER: IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT
REPRESENTATIVE: DAVE THOMAS, WIE
ZONING: MAJOR COMMUNITY FACILITY
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: MAJOR COMMUNITY FACILITY
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: THE CITY OF LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF
CEQA ( CEQA GUIDELINE 15301).
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
(COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
SOUTH: VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
(COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
(COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
EAST: VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
WEST
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RLV), CITY
The project is located on Imperial Irrigation District (IID) property at 81600 Avenue
58 within a fenced and restricted area which contains existing IID equipment,
substation and tower.
A:\PC staff rpt. Sprint CUP 2001-059.wpd 1'i J
MITIMMOMWermosilli
The applicant is requesting approval of 12 antennas mounted onto an existing 100
foot high tower located and installation of related equipment cabinets within the
interior restricted fenced area of the Imperial Irrigation District administrative center.
The antennas will add to the cellular digital service area in the east Coachella Valley.
The 12 antennas are 6'2' in height and 7'8" wide with an off-white color. As
proposed, the tower will be configured at 101 feet one inch in height. Also proposed
to be installed on the tower will be a telco microwave dish increasing telephone
service. Proposed to be installed on a concrete pad (within the interior restricted
fenced areal are five beige colored steel cabinets for Sprint equipment, a global
positioning antenna, a wave guide bridge, and additional chain link fencing to enclose
the area. Proposed lighting will be down lit on a switch used only for maintenance
and emergencies. Power to the antennas will be supplied underground from the
existing substation.
COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES:
The applicant's request was sent to City departments and affected public agencies
on April 12, 2001, requesting comments be returned by April 27, 2001. All
applicable comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on April 20, 2001.
All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice.
_� • ��•� •; • ray
The findings necessary to approve the Conditional Use Development Permit, as
conditioned, can be made per Section 9.210.020 of the Zoning Code as noted in the
attached Resolution. There are no issues.
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, approving Conditional Use
Permit 2001-059, subject to conditions.
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Project Location Exhibit
2. Site Plan and Elevations
AAPC staff rpt. Sprint CUP 2001-059.wpd - 1 y
Prepared by:
Principal Planner
Submitted by:
g
Christine di lorio
Planning Manager
A:\PC staff rpt. Sprint CUP 2001-059.wpd i
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
GRANTING APPROVING INSTALLATION OF
TELECOMMUNICATION APPARATUS TO BE
ATTACHED TO AN EXISTING 100 FOOT HIGH
TOWER AT 81600 AVENUE 58
CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-059
APPLICANT: SPRINT PCS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8'h day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
allowing installation of telecommunication apparatus located on an existing tower at
81600 Avenue 58, more particularly described as:
APN: 761-720- 021
WHEREAS, the City of La Quinta Community Development Department
has determined that this project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA
(CEQA guideline 15301); and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval:
That the proposed Conditional Use Permit is consistent with the goals and
policies of the La Quinta General Plan Policy 2-6.3.1 in that the property is
designated Major Community Facility which allows the uses proposed for the
property; and La Quinta General Plan Policy 7-1 .4.7 which requires the City to
coordinate with telephone companies to insure comprehensive and
uninterrupted service.
2. That the proposed Conditional Use Permit is consistent with the Zoning Code
Approval Standards (9.170.060) for telecommunication equipment placed on
existing towers.
3. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or general welfare in that the public agencies have reviewed the
project for these issues with no significant concerns identified.
AAPC.Reso.CUP2001-059. wpd
1
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
CUP 2001-059
May 8, 2001
NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby approve the above -described Conditional Use Permit
request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8" day of May, 2001, by the following
vote, to wit:
YES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman,
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
A:\PC.Reso.CUP2001-059.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-059
MAY 8, 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 shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
FIRE MARSHALL
2. Install a Knox pad lock at the manual gates as noted in the review plans.
Padlock shall be readily accessible for opening. Contact the Fire Department
for an application.
MISCELLANEOUS
3. Before any cranes, forklifts, or other aerial equipment are raised, please check
for overhead wires. Please note that California Title 8, Electrical Safety Orders,
specifies the closest distance that non -qualified electrical workers can get to
electrically energized conductors. Non -qualified electrical workers can get no
closer than ten (10) feet from distribution lines. People operating boom type
lifting or hoisting equipment can get no closer than ten (10) feet from the
distribution lines and no closer than seventeen feet (17) from transmission
lines.
If ground excavation is required, even for seemingly benign applications such
as anchoring a tent, please contact Underground Service Alert (USA). This
service is free of charge provided USA is given at least two (2) working days'
notice. Call toll free at 1-800-227-2600.
COA.PC.CUP 2001-059
PH #C
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 8, 2001
CASE NUMBER: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-701 (EAGLE BEND @ PGA
WEST)
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY
OWNER: CRV LA QUINTA 70, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (PETE BILICKI)
REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE PLANS
(COMPATIBILITY REVIEW) FOR TWO NEW PROTOTYPE
RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH THREE FACADES EACH IN TRACTS
28961 AND 28738 (70 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS)
LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF BELLERIVE AND WINGED FOOT
WITHIN PGA WEST (SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002)
BUILDER: INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
ARCHITECT: COLBOURN, CURRIER, AND NOLL, INC.
ENGINEER: M.D.S. CONSULTING (GEORGE PRINE)
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: DAVID NEAULT ASSOCIATES, INC.
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-701 IS WITHIN PGA WEST
SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBERS 83062922) WAS
CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN 1984 FOR SP 83-002. NO
CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS AND NO NEW
INFORMATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER
THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT EIR.
SR PC SDP 2001-701 EagleBend70 Greg 48 - R4/10; 5/2
BACKGROUND:
The property is located in PGA West adjacent to Bellerive, Winged Foot, Brae Burn,
Aronominic, Southern Hills and Baltusrol within the boundaries of Tracts 28961 and
28738, and Specific Plan 83-002. The approved Specific Plan provides Community
Design Guidelines for the residential units proposed in PGA West, a master planned
golfing community extending over 1,900 acres to be ultimately developed with 3,936
housing units and other resort hotel units.
Tract 28961, consisting of 48 single family lots on approximately 44+ acres, was
recorded with the Riverside Recorder's Office on March 23, 2000, while Tract 28738,
consisting of 22 single family lots on 8.3 acres, was recorded on December 24, 1998
(Attachment 1). These lots are generally 80 feet wide by 140 feet long. The builder,
Innovative Communities, has developed detached single family houses in PGA West
to the west of this site on Spanish Bay under Site Development Permit 98-636.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The project site is vacant and approved for 70 single family houses on existing private
streets. Two single story prototype house plans are proposed ranging in size from
2,985 square feet to 3,488 square feet. Each plan type, in California Mediterranean -
style architecture, offers a staggered facade and prominent stucco arched entry,
providing access to private courtyard areas. Exterior building materials consist of
plaster walls in varying color schemes using light and medium shades of red and brown
and roofs topped with clay S-tile in desert color tones. Accent exterior trim colors will
be in darker colors. An exterior material and color sample board of each theme will be
available at the meeting. Plan types are as follows:
Eagle Bend
Plan 1 (1 Story)
Plan 2 (1 Story)
Sq. Footage
2,985
3,488
Bedrooms
3
3 + Retreat
Garage
Parking Spaces
3
Front -loaded
3
Front -loaded
Notes: A courtyard fireplace is shown Tor Tian z. oiae yara secoacKS are o anu iaryer.
Decorative stucco plant-ons accent inset fan -topped windows on the front building
elevations and encase other side and rear windows; facade options also include stucco
pot shelves. To create variation, front elevation windows also vary in width from 3'
to 5'.
A front yard landscaping plan has been submitted consisting of a minimum of three
street trees (36" boxes) per lot accented by sod, a variety of five and fifteen gallon
w ),
SR PC SDP 2001-701 EagleBend70 Greg 48 - R4/10; 5/2 < 1 5 i_(
shrubs, and splashes of annual color (Attachment 2). Tree species for the project are
consistent with the plant palette for PGA West, including California Pepper, Jacaranda,
Bottle tree, Citrus, etc. Palm trees will be used to accentuate private courtyard and
rear yard areas. The model complex is proposed to be located on Baltusrol across the
street from the future 0.733 acre mini park (Lot F of Tract 28961) for these semi -
custom housing units (Attachment 3).
Public Notice
The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 26, 2001, and mailed
to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. No comments have been received.
Any comments received will be handed out at the meeting.
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) Action
On May 2, 2001, the ALRC considered this request, and by Minute Motion 2001-020,
determined that the proposed architectural design and landscaping to be compatible
with the existing PGA West houses, subject to recommended conditions. A draft copy
of the Minutes from the meeting is attached (Attachment 4).
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
As required by Section 9.60.300 (Compatibility Review) of the Zoning Ordinance, the
Planning Commission is required to make the following findings:
A two-story house shall not be constructed adjacent to or abutting a lot line of
an existing single -story home constructed in a prior phase of the same
subdivision unless proof can be provided showing that a two-story unit was
proposed for the lot by the prior builder.
Response: PGA West Specific Plan 83-002 prohibits two story houses from
being built in these tracts pursuant to City Council Resolution 2000-130. No
two story houses are proposed.
2. If lot fencing has been provided in the subdivision, the new developer shall
provide the same or better type of fencing for the new dwellings, as determined
by the Planning Commission, including any perimeter subdivision fencing.
Response: PGA West fencing is typically 5' to 6', constructed of masonry block
clad in stucco. Condition 413 requires the developer to provide masonry privacy
walls compatible with existing houses ensuring they will be architecturally
compatible.
3. Proposed single-family dwellings shall be compatible to existing dwellings in the
project or to dwellings which are approved for construction as shown on the
if+i2
SR PC SDP 2001-701 Eagle Bend70 Greg 48 - R4/10; 5/2 "_
plans and materials board, unless otherwise approved by the Planning
Commission, with respect to architectural materials, colors, roof lines, lot area,
and building mass.
Response: Based on the recommended conditions, the development of the new
prototype units are architecturally compatible with existing housing units.
4. At least one specimen tree (minimum 24" box) shall be provided in the front
yard and street side yard with a total number of trees on each lot to be the
same as that provided for on other PGA West units.
Response: The plans provide conceptual design and planting information for
the front yards utilizing oversized box trees with other site planting. The
applicant's plant pallette includes those plants used in the City and more
specifically that of SP 83-002. Project landscaping, including but not limited to
the location and coverage of plant materials, has been designed to complement
single family buildings and complement surrounding houses. Condition 4A
requires specimen trees to be planted with the development of the new houses
to give a mature appearance when the house is sold. Even though a lush
landscape design is required by PGA West, the applicant must also comply with
the City's Water Efficiency Ordinance.
5. The single-family dwelling units proposed within a partially developed
subdivision shall not deviate by more than 10 percent from the square footage
of the original units by the original developer which have either been approved
or constructed.
Response: Existing houses range in size from 1,290 square feet to over 4,800
square feet; therefore, the developer's housing units are consistent is size and
do not exceed the ten percent (10%) allotment.
6. Residential units with identical, or similar, front elevations shall not be placed
on adjacent lots or directly across the street from one another.
Response: The prototype houses provide contrasting elevations that
complement an expansion of the PGA West development. Three facades per
plan are proposed creating a varied architectural style. Facade planes are varied
via building wall setbacks and inset windows, thereby providing defining
architectural character to the streetscape setting. Decorative lighting features
and ornamental pedestrian gates create variation among each plan type.
u04
SR PC SDP 2001-701 EagleBend70 Greg 48 - R4/10; 5/2 , 1. 5 ,r 7
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ approving Site Development Permit
2000-701, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
1 . Site Location
2. Front Yard Landscaping
3. Model Complex
4. ALRC Draft Minutes dated 5/2/01
5. Architectural Exhibits - Commission Members Only
GrecKTrodWeW,, Associate Planner
Submitted by:
CLL-, �- �&
Christine di lorio, Planning Manager
SR PC SDP 2001-701 EagleBend70 Greg 48 - R4/10; 5/2 (J 5
153
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
PROTOTYPE HOUSE PLANS IN PGA WEST
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-701
APPLICANT: CRV LA QUINTA 70, L.P.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 81h day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the
request of CRV La Quinta 70, L.P. to approve architectural and landscaping plans for
two new prototype residential plans to be constructed on private streets located at the
northwest corner of Bellerive and Winged Foot in Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West),
pursuant Section 9.60.300 of the Zoning Code; and
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee of the
City of La Quinta, California, did on the 2"d day of May, 2001, hold a public meeting
to consider the request of CRV La Quinta 70, L.P. to approve architectural and
landscaping plans for two new prototype residential plans that range in size from
2,985 square feet to 3,488 square feet to be constructed in PGA West, and by a vote
of 2-0 adopted Minute Motion 2001-020, subject to conditions, more particularly
described as:
70 single family lots within Tracts 28961 and 28738
WHEREAS, Site Development Permit 2001-701 is within PGA West
Specific Plan 83-002. Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number
83062922) was certified by the City Council in 1984 for SP 83-002. No changed
circumstances or conditions and no information has been provided which would trigger
the preparation of a subsequent Environmental Impact Report.
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. The proposed units are of a compatible architectural design, colors, and
materials to the existing units in PGA West. The units utilize similar
architectural features such as concrete S-tile roofs, exterior plaster, arches,
popout stucco surrounds, inset windows, varied front yard setbacks, decorative
eaves and lighting.
2. The proposed landscaping plans will provide a minimum of one 24" box size tree
in the front yard area. All units will have at least one additional tree and other
shrubs and groundcover. Corner lots require a minimum of five trees with one
tree a 24" box specimen.
3. Masonry walls are proposed between units and will be compatible with existing
walls in PGA West (i.e., stucco).
A:AResoPC Eagle Bend.wpd - Greg (48); - �.i
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Site Development Permit 2001-701
CRV La Quinta 70, L.P.
May 8, 2001
4. The size range of the existing residences is 1,290 to over 4,800 square feet.
The proposed units vary from 2,985 square feet to 3,488 square feet with three
car garages. This request is in compliance with compatibility review and
parking Code requirements.
5. The final plot plan will ensure compliance with the requirement that identical,
or similar, front elevations shall not be placed on adjacent lots or directly across
the street from one another.
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 Site Development Permit 2001-701 for the reasons
set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A",
attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 8th day of May, 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
A:AResoPC Eagle Bend.wpd - Greg (48);
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001- EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-701
CRV, LA QUINTA 70, L.P.
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1 . Developer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta
in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of
this project. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense
counsel at its sole discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the developer of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. This Site Development Permit approval shall expire and become null and void on
May 8, 2003.
3. Detailed front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department for review and approval prior to issuance of any
building permit for units authorized by this approval in compliance with Chapter
8.13 (Water Efficient Landscaping) of the Municipal Code. The landscape and
irrigation plans shall be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District and
Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner prior to submittal to the final plans
to the Community Development Department in compliance with SP 83-002.
4. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this
approval, final working drawings shall be approved by the Community
Development Department, including the following:
A. Front yard landscaping shall consist of a minimum of two trees, ten 5-
gallon shrubs, turf and groundcover. A minimum of one tree per interior
lot shall be 24" box in size having a 1 .5 inch caliper measured three feet
up from grade level after planting. Corner lots require two specimen
trees and three 15-gallon trees (i.e., 0.75 inch caliper or larger). Lodge
poles (2" diameter) shall be used to stake trees. All shrubs and trees
shall be irrigated by bubbler or emitters and be approved by the PGA
Homeowners Association. The landscape plan shall meet the City's
Water Efficiency Ordinance within the confines of the Specific Plan.
Cond SDP 701 Eagle Bend - 48; Page 1 - gt
UJ$
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-701
CRV, LA QUINTA 70, L.P.
MAY 8, 2001
B. Stucco privacy walls shall be constructed for each house, unless
substitute materials are allowed by the Community Development
Director.
4. A Minor Use Permit application shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department for approval to establish a temporary model home
sales complex and guest parking lot (e.g., 10 spaces) in the project, pursuant
to Section 9.60.250 and Chapter 9.150 of the Zoning Code.
5. The developer shall comply with all applicable conditions of Tracts 28738 and
28901, and Specific Plan 83-002.
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 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 Department.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
7. 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.
8. Prior to building permit issuance, the developer shall pay school mitigation fees
to the Coachella Valley Unified School District based on the State imposed fee
in effect at that time. The school facilities' fee shall be established by
Resolution (i.e., State of California School Facilities Financing Act).
Cond SDP 701 Eagle Bend - 48; Page 2 - gt
. 157
ATTACHMENTS
olo
Attachment 1
,TTTTL Spv �� I 18
NORTH
21
20
19
1e
17
16
0
15 SHEET 5
°w AIRPORT
BOULEVARD
' --
I
I /
9� HIII
'j Fill
Z it l
'j III
�> ; �32 14
'r> 3\ B 1 1 I SHEWT as
" Q
�(r % TRACT w. F<( t t II I
36 7 F e 7 6 5 4 3 2
/y s JT c�G 3I
a40I14243414346:47
/r
.0 LOT H
3w At
/"/N /SpgZVI/ �GOLY COURSE
I") ° �.rx.v�.ze, s 4 I I
i _u11
��� �J
"
LL1JnIJJ�l111'1'� u
N
0
a
O
LD
LOT
ITEM: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-701, EAGLE
BEND @ PGA WEST
15?
Attachment 2
M
SI
K,51
N
Z
Jia
d
4
4
r;
e�
1�
t
Attachment 3
f0mms
kr13
161
Attachment 4
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
May 2, 2001
project.
the
4. There being no further discu 'emit was moved and seconded by
Committee Membe nningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2001-01 ommending approval of Site Development Permit
04 subject to conditions as recommended. Unanimously
B. Site Development Permit 2000-701; a request of CRV La Quinta 70,
(/ Limited Partnership for review of architectural and landscape plans for
two new prototype residential units each with three facades located at
the northwest corner of Bellerive and Winged Foot within PGA West
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. Committee Member Cunningham asked staff to identify the
location. Mr. Peter Bilicki noted on the plans the location.
Committee Member Cunningham stated he had no issues with the
project.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had no questions or
objections to the project.
4. Mr. R. C. Hobbs asked for clarification as to when a compatibility
review was required. Staff explained when a compatibility review
was required. Discussion followed regarding compatibility.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Bobbitt/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion
2001-020, recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-701, subject to the conditions
C. ite o ment Permit 2001-702; a request of La Quinta Kingdom Hall
of Jehovah ses for review of landscaping and architectural plans
for a church on 2. res on the east side of Dune Palms Road,
between Westward Ho Drive the Coachella Valley Storm Channel.
1. Planning Consultant Nicole Cristt
contained in the staff report, a copy
Community Development Department.
the information
is on file in the
u14
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC5-2-Ol.wpd 2 1 1 6 2
PH #D
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: MAY 8, 2001
CASE NUMBER: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30136
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY
OWNER: SRHI, LLC (RIELLY HOMES)
LOCATION: 1,200 FEET EAST OF MADISON STREET ABUTTING BOTH SIDES
OF LEGENDS WAY AND WEST OF MOUNTAIN VIEW IN PGA
WEST
REQUEST: REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 18.94 ACRES INTO 62 SINGLE FAMILY
AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS COMMON LOTS
ENGINEER: M.D.S. CONSULTING (CHRIS BERGH)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THIS TRACT IS WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 83-0002 (PGA WEST)
FOR WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT #83062922
WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN 1984. NO CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS AND NO NEW INFORMATION
HAS BEEN PROVIDED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE
PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT EIR.
GENERAL
PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) AND RL (LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL) PER SP 83-002, AMENDMENT #4
BACKGROUND:
The PGA West Resort and Club is made up of numerous tracts which have been
approved after adoption of Specific Plan 83-002 (Resolution 84-31) and its companion
Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #83062922) in 1984. Existing
STPC 30136 RiellyPGA Final - 48 GREG; R4/6;4/26
Page 1 of 3
housing units range in size from 1,283 square feet to over 5,000 square feet. PGA
West is a private country club community of approximately 2,000 residences and
multiple championship golf courses.
REQUEST:
The applicant has requested to increase the number of residential lots in portion of
Tract 28838 (Phases 1 and 4) from 45 to 62, an increase of 17 lots. This change is
proposed in order to provide lots sufficient in size for prototype house plans #7-9 that
were approved by the Community Development Department last year. Lot sizes range
from 8,840 square feet up to 21,140 square feet which is consistent with the other
approved lots in PGA West and Tract 28838 (See Attachment #1)• In addition to
adding new lots, minor changes are proposed to the alignment of portions of Legends
Way where it intersects with Common Landscape Lot "C".
Public Notice
This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 26, 2001, and
mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site. To date, no comments have
been received from adjacent property owners. Any written comments received will be
handed out at the meeting.
Public Agency Review
A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City
Departments. All written comments received are on file with the Community
Development Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the
recommended Conditions of Approval.
MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings to approve this request per Section 13.12.130 of the Subdivision Ordinance
can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City Council
approval of Tentative Tract Map 30136, subject to findings and conditions.
STPC 30136 Rie11yPGA Final - 48 GREG; R4/6;4/26
Page 2 of 3
u02
1G
Attachments:
1 . TTM 30136 Map
2. Large Exhibit (Planning Commission Only)
Submitted by:
:r 4Cri`st&nedi orio, fanning Manager
STPC 30136 Rie11yPGA Final - 48 GREG; R4/6;4/26
Page 3 of 3
tl U .3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL TO SUBDIVIDE 18.94 ACRES INTO 62
SINGLE FAMILY AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS LOCATED
APPROXIMATELY 1,200 FEET EAST OF MADISON
STREET, ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF LEGENDS
WAY AND WEST OF MOUNTAIN VIEW IN PGA WEST
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30136
APPLICANT: SRHI, LLC (d.b.a. RIELLY HOMES)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8"' day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for SRHI, LLC to
subdivide 18.94 acres into 62 single family and other common lots generally located
1,200 feet east of Madison Street abutting portions of Legends Ways and Mountain
View, more particularly described as:
Being a subdivision of Lots 17-21 of Amended Tract 28838-1;
and Lots 1-40, and A-F of Tract 28838-4
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 TTM 30136 to the City Council pursuant to Section 13.12.130 of the
Subdivision Ordinance:
A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan and
Zoning Ordinance.
The property is designated Low Density Residential (LDR). The Land Use
Element of the General Plan allows residential land uses. The project is
consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan Land
Use Element (Chapter 2) because attached and detached residential units are
proposed. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals, objectives,
and policies of the General Plan Circulation Element.
The proposed single family lots exceed the minimum size requirement of 6,500
square feet. The proposed 62 residential lots are consistent with and will not
negatively impact the overall growth and development of PGA West.
Conditions are recommended ensuring compliance with both the PGA West
Specific Plan and Zoning Code.
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance.
RESOPCTTM 30136Final - 48- GREG T. L) 0 `3
i6
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Tentative Tract Map 30136 - Recommended
SRHI, LLC
May 8, 2001
Page 2
Tentative Tract Map 30136 is within Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West) for
which Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number 83062922)
was certified by the City Council in 1984. No changed circumstances or
conditions exist and no new information has been provided which would trigger
the preparation of a subsequent EIR.
The proposed site design conforms with the design guidelines identified in SP
83-002 and provides a harmonious transition between other approved
residential tracts in PGA West.
The proposed common landscaping will be privately maintained. The landscape
design complements the surrounding residential areas in that it enhances the
aesthetic and visual quality of the area.
The site is physically suitable for the proposed land division.
Stormwater runoff will be diverted to the existing golf course to ensure off -site
properties are not impacted from seasonal storms.
The proposed private street serves all proposed lots and connects to other
existing streets in the PGA West development. Internal access is provided as
required ensuring public safety vehicles proper access to this residential area.
Infrastructure improvements such as gas, electric, sewer and water will be
extended to service the site in underground facilities as planned under the
Specific Plans. 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 require compliance with those mitigation measures required
for Specific Plan 83-002, as amended; and
3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of TTM 30136 for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions.
uU5
RESOPCTTM 30136Final - 48- GREG T.
16 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Tentative Tract Map 30136 - Recommended
SRHI, LLC
May 8, 2001
Page 3
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 8`h day of May, 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 Quinta, California
RESOPCTTM 30136Final - 48- GREG T.
006
163
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30136 - SRHI, LLC
MAY 8, 2001
GENERAL
1. Tentative Tract Map 30136 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 approval shall expire and become null and void within two years of
approval unless an extension of time is granted according to the requirements of
Section 13.12.150 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
3. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in
the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this
project. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in
its sole discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
4. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of any
building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits
and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Coachella Valley Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District
• Imperial Irrigation District
• California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from
those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans,
applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the
plans.
Cond PC Tr. 30136 - 48 Greg i
16
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. Projects disturbing 5 or more acres, or smaller
projects which are part of a larger project disturbing 5 or more acres require a
project -specific NPDES permit. The applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB
acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent (NOI) prior to issuance of a
grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required
Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP) is available for inspection at the
project site.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
5. 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.
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. PRIVATE STREETS
Residential: 37-foot width.
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. 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.
10, 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.
11. 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
Cond PC Tr. 30136 - 48 Greg U O
easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property
owners
12. 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.
FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(Sl
13. 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 and
in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard
AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad
program.
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.
14. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified
engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on
24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets
& Drainage," and "Landscaping. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks
for Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall
have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for
construction until they are signed.
"Streets and Drainage plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths,
entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include
irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. 'Precise
Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
Cond PC Tr. 30136 - 48 Greg U U 9
lei
15. 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.
16. 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.
GRADING
17. 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.
18. Slopes shall not exceed 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each
Cond PC Tr. 30136 - 48 Greg 010
172
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
22. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan
for PGA West. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved method.
UTILITIES
23. 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.
24. 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.
25. 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
26. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the
General Plan street type noted in parentheses.
a. PRIVATE STREETS
Residential: 34-foot travel width, measured gutter flow -line to gutter
flow -line.
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.
Cond PC Tr. 30136 - 48 Greg U �,
1I3
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard
Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer.
30. 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.
31. 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 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
32. 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.
33. 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
Cond PC Tr. 30136 - 48 Greg u 1 2
i
pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the tract
or when directed by the City, whichever comes first.
LANDSCAPING
34. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas and
medians shall be prepared by a landscape architect and be prepared based on the
water conservation measures in Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development
Department. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been
approved and signed by the Coachella Valley Water District and the Riverside
County Agricultural Commissioner.
35. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated
to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures.
36. The developer and subsequent property owner shall continuously maintain all
required landscaping in a healthy and viable condition as required by Section
9.60.240 (E3) of the Zoning Ordinance.
37. 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.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
38. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
39. 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.
40. 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.
41. 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
Cond PC Tr. 30136 - 48 Greg 013
of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously
submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions.
MAINTENANCE
42. 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
43. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking
and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when
the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits.
44. Prior to approval of a final map or completion of any approval process for
modification of boundaries of the property or lots subject to these conditions, the
applicant shall process a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against the
property and pay the cost of the reapportionment.
45. The developer shall pay school mitigation fees to the Coachella Valley Unified
School District based on the requirements of SP 83-002. Fees shall be paid prior
to building permit issuance by the City.
46. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's
adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
47. Approved standard fire hydrants, located at each street intersection and spaced not
more than 330 feet apart with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from
a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1,000 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 psi.
48. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of streets directly in line with fire
hydrants.
49. Applicant/developer will provide written certification for the appropriate water
company that the required fire hydrant(s) are either existing or that financial
arrangements have been made to provide them.
Cond PC Tr. 30I36 - 48 Greg A `*
17)
50. Gates, if any, shall be equipped with a rapid entry system (KNOX). Plans shall be
submnitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. Gate pins shall
be rated with a shear pin force, not to exceed 30 pounds. Gates activated by the
rapid entry system shall remain open until closed by the rapid entry system.
51. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being
placed on an individual lot.
MISCELLANEOUS
52. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file
documents for plan checking purposes.
53. Applicable conditions of Specific Plans 83-002 shall be met prior to building permit
issuance.
54. The project's HOA will be organized to administer and maintain common open
space, private roads, security, and architectural consistency pursuant to the
requirements of SP 83-002. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for the
tract shall be approved by the City Attorney prior to approval of the final map by the
City Council.
Cond PC Tr. 30136 - 48 Grcg v y 5
ATTACHMENTS
o16
173
I
i;e 1 jl 11 a �al
8118 ,. ;E e : 1
_ r-0
9g ii If lilt
1p (�
�16 till
BIBi k d it it l0 5sS B i�i 9leeB�d 91; B ow
" Q
r
W
N
Z
r: oW
nip
- --- ----
<—
t
�_ a tpt9x oN ravel 1.._ 1
-@i :.
"pp
x
_
LU
Y`.
p
r `Gyy
�r
r
d�
j
PH #E
Tityl 4 4 Q"
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBER OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR W
DATE: MAY 8, 2001
SUBJECT: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-693, 99 CENT STORE
The applicant in the above referenced matter has requested a two week continuance
in order to revise their plans to incorporate the changes recommended by the
Architectural and Landscape Review Committee.
Staff respectfully requests that the Commission continue the item to the regularly
scheduled meeting of May 22, 2001.
PH #F
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: MAY 8, 2001
CASE NO.: ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT #41,
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-078, ZONE CHANGE 2001-
101, SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, AMENDMENT #5, SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-703 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
30125
REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR CERTIFICATION
OF AN ADDENDUM TO AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT;
APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE
CHANGE TO CHANGE LANDS CURRENTLY TOURIST
COMMERCIAL TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND
DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 65 SINGLE
FAMILY HOMES, COMMON AREA FACILITIES AND AMENDMENT
OF THE LANDSCAPING PLANT PALETTE; DEVELOPMENT PLANS
FOR THE MODEL HOMES; AND SUBDIVISION OF 17.82 ACRES
INTO 65 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND MISCELLANEOUS LOTS.
LOCATION: THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND
AVENUE 50.
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP.
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: AN ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT #41
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 CERTIFICATION OF THE ADDENDUM.
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING DESIGNATIONS:
TOURIST COMMERCIAL
PROPOSED: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
G:\WPDOCS\PCStfrptSP121 E.wpd ' - 11 1- J 1
BACKGROUND:
The project site is located at the southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50.
The proposed project is currently developed for a portion of the La Quinta Resort Golf
Course, and is also being used for employee parking for the La Quinta Resort. The
lands currently used for parking are proposed for conversion from Tourist Commercial
to Low Density Residential. The proposal is for single family detached units on 6,000
square foot minimum lots.
Project Request
In addition to the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41, the following
applications have been filed:
1 . A General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to change a six acre portion of
the project surrounded by 11 acres already designated as single family
residential from its current Tourist Commercial designation to Low Density
Residential.
2. A Specific Plan to establish development standards and design guidelines for the
construction of 65 single family homes and common area amenities, and to
amend the approved plant palette (Attachment 2).
3. A Site Development Permit for the model home elevations, site landscaping, and
construction of perimeter improvements for the site.
4. A Tentative Tract Map to divide 17.82 acres into 65 single family lots, a
common pool and clubhouse lot, and miscellaneous lots for roads and open
space.
The General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are required to allow single family
dwelling units on the site. The Specific Plan provides the design guidelines and
development standards for the single family homes. A Site Development Permit has
also been submitted to include the three models of house planned for the site, as well
as perimeter and entry landscaping. A separate Site Development Permit will be
required for the pool building or clubhouse for the northwestern corner of the project.
The Site Development Permit details the architectural style of the buildings, and the
types of materials which will be utilized. The variations to the City's zoning standards
are discussed individually below.
Project Description
The Specific Plan includes modifications only in two areas: the design guidelines and
development standards for the affected Planning Area, and the broadening of the
landscaping palette (Attachment 4). The design guidelines and standards allow for the
construction of single family homes and associated uses.
UfJ2
G:\WPDOCS\PCStfrptSP121 E.wpd •V 182
The homes' architecture is similar to the Mediterranean architecture found elsewhere
in the Resort. Materials to be utilized include smooth stucco, wooden rafters, gates
and shutters, wrought iron grills and clay roof tile. The design includes raised window
details, stucco recesses and an optional roof terrace. The design also incorporates
curved walls and exterior stairs around a central courtyard. The applicant has provided
considerable articulation on all sides of the residences, which will create visual interest
and break up the building mass. Doorways and windows include arches and pot
ledges, to provide further detail. The color palette is proposed to be neutral, and
consist primarily of earth tones.
The plant palette is consistent with that found in other parts of the Resort. Stamped
concrete is proposed for the entry of the project site. A perimeter wall is proposed, but
no berming is shown on the landscaping plan.
The Tentative Tract Map divides the 17.82 acres into 65 single family lots, one
common area pool and clubhouse lot, and miscellaneous lots for roads and open space
areas. The Tract Map has been conditioned to include all necessary perimeter roadway
improvements. The Tract Map is consistent with the proposed Specific Plan.
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee:
The ALRC reviewed the proposed landscaping and building elevations at their meeting
of May 2, 2001, and recommended approval subject to conditions (Attachment 3).
Public Notice: This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on April
26, 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.
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, Zone
Change, Specific Plan and Site Development Permit can be made, as noted in the
attached Resolutions with the exception of:
A. Specific Plan:
1. Development Standards: The applicant has stated that a small clubhouse
may be constructed where the poolhouse is currently shown, in the northwestern
corner of the property. The Specific Plan currently does not allow this use. Condition
#15 (SP) has been added to address this issue.
G:\WPDOCS\PCStfrptSP121 E.wpd - U U 3
1S3
The minimum lot size is shown in the Specific Plan to be 6,500 square feet in this
Planning Area. Since some lots on the accompanying tract map do not meet this
standard (the smallest lot is 6,022 s.f.), Condition #17 (SP) has been added to
accommodate the smallest proposed lot.
No signage is proposed as part of the Specific Plan submittal for this portion of the
project area. Condition #19 (SP) has been added to address this issue.
The landscaping palette in the currently adopted Specific Plan significantly limits the
plant types permitted on the site. The landscaping plan does not conform to that plant
palette. A broadened plant palette has been submitted (Attachment 4), and is to be
included as an approved landscaping palette for the entire Specific Plan (Condition
#20, SP).
B. Site Development Permit
1. Landscape Design: The landscaping plan does not specify either the size
of proposed plants, or the number of each plant proposed. In order to ensure that the
final plans are consistent, Conditions #1 and #2 (SDP) are proposed. This will ensure
that staff can effectively review the final plan for conformance with this approval.
The perimeter wall will require articulation in order to provide visual interest. Condition
#3 (SDP) has been added to address this issue.
CONCLUSION:
The General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Plan Amendment, Site
Development Permit and Tentative Tract Map, as conditioned, represent an appropriate
use of the parcel on which they are proposed. The Specific Plan and Site Development
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 an Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41.
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001- , recommending to the City
Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2001-078.
3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-, recommending to the City
Council approval of Zone Change 2001-101.
4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-, recommending to the City
Council approval of Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment #5, subject to the findings
and conditions.
GAWPDOCS\PCStfrptSP121E.wpd U J4
5. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-, recommending to the City
Council approval of Site Development Permit 2001-703, subject to the findings
and conditions.
6. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-, recommending to the City
Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 30125, subject to the findings and
conditions.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Specific Plan 121-E Document (Large exhibits - Commissioners only)
3. ALRC Minutes for May 2, 2001
4. Amended Landscape Palette (Large exhibits - Commissioners only)
Prepared by:
Submitted by:
Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner Christine di lorio, Planning Manager
u05
G:\WPDOCS\PCStfrptSP121E.wpd _ 1 8r
1 J
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT #41 PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT 2001-078, ZONE CHANGE 2001-101,
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E AMENDMENT #5, SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-703, AND TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 30125
CASE NO: EIR #41 ADDENDUM
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 8th of May, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider an
Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41 for General Plan Amendment 2001-
078, Zone Change 2001-101, Specific Plan 121-E -- Amendment #5, Site
Development Permit 2001-703 and Tentative Tract Map 30125 located at the
southeast corner of Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive, and more particularly described
as follows:
APN's 658-190-004, 773-020-033, 770-020-021, 773-020-034
WHEREAS, said Addendum 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 determined that although the proposed General Plan
Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101, Specific Plan 121-E -- Amendment
#5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and Tentative Tract Map 30125 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
Addendum and included in the Conditions of Approval; 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
Addendum:
1. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 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 the Addendum.
006
G:\WPDOCS\PCReso KS LEA. wpd
1 186
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
KSL Development Corporation
EIR#41 Addendum
May 8, 2001
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 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 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 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
Addendum.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 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.
5. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 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.
6. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may
have a significant effect on the environment.
7. The Planning Commission has considered the Addendum to Environmental
Impact Report #41 and the Addendum reflects the independent judgement of
the City.
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSLEA.wpd
007
1S7
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
KSL Development Corporation
EIR#41 Addendum
May 8, 2001
8. 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).
9. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the
Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La
Quinta, California.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Addendum.
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of the
Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Addendum text on file in the Community
Development Department.
3. That the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41 reflects the
independent judgement of the City.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 8th day of May, 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
U08
G:\WPD O C S\PC ResoKS LEA. wpd
�� 1�J
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(CEQA GUIDELINE 15164)
FOR
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2001-078, AMENDMENT NO. 5
TO
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E,
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 2001-101,
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-703 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30125
MAY 8, 2001
G:\WPD0CS\ElRAddKSL1 21 E. WPD
U09
I, IS9
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 Environmental Impact
Report #41 ("EIR") that the County of Riverside certified in 1975 for the La Quinta
Resort Specific Plan, SP 121-E.
The purpose of this Addendum is to document certain changes to the project which
will be implemented through the following land use approvals:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2001-78,
AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E,
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 2001-101,
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-70 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30125
These are collectively referred to as "the Revised Project."
The Revised Project consists of 17.82 acres of the 622 acre project. Six acres of the
Revised Project area is currently designated Tourist Commercial and the remaining 11
acres is designated as Low Density Residential. The Revised Project will convert
currently vacant lands of which six acres os being used as interim employee parking
areas to low density residential lots, and ancillary facilities including a clubhouse and
associated amenities. The City has determined that the proposed residential
development will be consistent with the density and character of the adjacent
residential development, and will be consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives
of the City's General Plan and Specific Plan 121-E, as amended.
The Revised Project does not represent an increase in the total number of units allowed
within the Specific Plan boundary. The Specific Plan "cap" on residential units remains
622 units in the low density residential category. The approvals requested include the
following:
1 . General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone to change the designation on six
acres of the 17.82 acres from Tourist Commercial to Low Density Residential;
2. Specific Plan Amendment to incorporate the General plan Amendment and Zone
Change above, and to expand the landscaping palette within the Specific Plan;
3. Site Development Permit to review the design of three residential unit types for
the proposed homes within the same 17.82 acres; and
4. Tentative Tract Map to divide the 17.82 acres into 65 single family lots, a
clubhouse lot, and a number of numbered lots for streets and common open
space areas.
The City has compared the impacts of the Revised Project with those impacts analyzed
in the EIR and finds as follows:
- �10
` ]JJ
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAdd KSL121 E.WPD
Aesthetics - Impacts no
greater than those
previously analyzed.
The previously
approved Tourist
Commercial designation
will be replaced with
less dense housing.
The scale, height, and
mass will all be
reduced within this
area as compared with
the original project. The
elimination of employee
parking will be a
beneficial impact for
the area.
Agriculture Resources -
Not applicable
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials - Impacts no
greater than those
previously analyzed.
Hydrology and Water
Quality - Impacts lower
than those previously
analyzed. Tourist
commercial development
can be expected to
generate an equivalent
amount of water usage
as residential
development. The single
family homes on the
site, however, will
create a lower
percentage of
impervious surfaces,
which will result in more
surface water
percolation.
Public Services -
Impacts lower than
those previously
analyzed. The impacts
associated with Tourist
Commercial
development would
have been expected to
be greater than those
associated.
Recreation - Impacts no
greater than those
previously analyzed.
The Revised project will
include on -site
clubhouse facilities, and
will be surrounded by
golf course. The overall
number of residential
units within the total
project will not increase.
Impacts to recreational
facilities will not
increase over those
already analysed.
0 11.
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAdd KSL121 E.WPD 1
Air Quality - Impacts no
greater than those
previously analyzed.
Although residential
development generates
a high number of trips
per unit, tourist
c o m m e r c i a l
development is also a
high trip generator.
Since the certification of
the original EIR, PM10
has become an issue of
concern in the Coachella
Valley. The City requires
the development of
PM10 management
plans, which are
reviewed and approved
by the City Engineer
prior to the issuance of
building permits. The
project proponent will
be required to submit
such a plan, which will
provide sufficient
mitigation to assure that
PM10 impacts are
reduced to less than
significant levels.
The construction air
quality impacts will be
reduced for single family
homes over those
analyzed for tourist
c o m m e r c i a l
development in the EIR,
since single family home
construction disturbs
less ground, is of
shorter duration, and
requires less equipment.
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 the
Specific Plan, and
continues the
development pattern
established in the
Specific Plan.
Transportation/Traffic-
Impacts less than those
previously analyzed. The
single family units will
not increase the total
number of units to be
constructed within the
project, and will
therefore not increase
the number of residential
trips to be generated by
the project at buildout.
The elimination of the
tourist commercial
development will reduce
the overall number of
trips to and from the
project at buildout.
u12
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL121 E.WPD `-J .. 1 J 7
Biological Resources -
Impacts in addition to
those previously
analyzed. Since
certification of the
original EIR, species of
concern in the Coachella
Valley have increased. A
preliminary biological
resource analysis
conducted for the
Revised Project
indicated the presence
of a mesquite hummock
on the site, which will
be eliminated by the
construction of the
homes. Mesquite
hummocks provide
important habitat to a
number of species of
concern. In order to
mitigate this potential
impact, the following
mitigation measure shall
be implemented:
Prior to construction or
site preparation
activities, the project
developer shall enter
into a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU)
with CDFG and an
appropriate non-profit
organization whose
purpose is to acquire
and manage land for the
purpose of protecting
special status plants and
wildlife. This MOU shall
provide the organization
chosen the financial
resources necessary to
purchase and manage
1.1 acres of mesquite
hummock habitat in the
Biological Resources
cont'd -
The Revised project also
was identified as
potential habitat for
Coachella Valley Fringe -
toed Lizard and
Coachella Valley Milk
Vetch. Site surveys are
being conducted, and
the project proponent
will be required to
conform to the
mitigation measures
resulting from these
studies.
Utilities and Service
Systems - Impacts less
than those previously
analyzed. The proposed
residential units will
generate a lower need
for utilities and service
systems than
development of a tourist
commercial project on
six acres of the site.
U13
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL121 E.WPD
1J3
Cultural Resources -
Mineral Resources - Not
Population and Housing -
Impacts no greater than
applicable.
Impacts less than those
those previously
previously analyzed.
analyzed. The site has
The change in land use
been previously
designation will reduce
disturbed, and is not
the potential number of
expected to contain
jobs to be generated by
culturally significant
the project overall, and
resources. Should
will not create a need for
r e s o u r c e s b e
additional housing.
encountered during site
grading and excavation,
the project proponent
shall cease all work on
the site until an
archaeological monitor
has been retained.
014
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL121 E.WPD
Geology and Soils -
Impacts no greater than
those previously
analyzed. The project
proponent shall be
required to implement
the Uniform Building
Code for Zone III
groundshaking zones,
and shall be required to
prepare site -specific
soils analysis prior to
issuance of building
permits.
Noise - Impacts have
changed from those
previously analyzed. A
noise impact analysis
was prepared for the
Revised Project. The
noise analysis identified
potential impacts to
homes adjacent to both
Avenue 50 and
Eisenhower Drive. In
order to mitigate this
impact, the following
mitigation measures
shall be implemented.
1. A 6 foot wall above a
four foot berm shall be
erected on both the
Eisenhower Drive and
Avenue 50 frontages of
the Revised Project.
2. Interior noise levels
shall not exceed 45 dBA
CNEL.
3.All construction
activities shall be limited
to the hours prescribed
in the La Quinta
Municipal Code.
4. Construction
staging areas
shall be located
as far from
e x i s t i n g
residential
development as
possible.
U15
G:\WPDOCS\E1RAdd KSL121 E.WPD
The City finds that consideration of the Revised Project does not call for the
preparation of a subsequent EIR 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 EIR 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 EIR 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 EIR substantially increase the
severity of previously identified impacts.
U16
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAdd KSL121 E.WPD `� J
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 CHANGE IN LAND
DESIGNATION FROM TOURIST COMMERCIAL TO LOW
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR SIX ACRES OF LAND
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER
DRIVE AND AVENUE 50
CASE NO.: GPA 2001-078
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8th day of May, 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 Low Density Residential to six acres located within a 17.82 acre parcel
at the southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50, and more specifically
described as follows:
APN's: 658-190-004, 773-020-033, 773-020-021, 773-020-034
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 on six acres of land from Tourist Commercial
to Low Density Residential. The proposed amendment is surrounded by
approximately 11 acres designated as Low Density Residential in the General
Plan. The proposed amendment maintains consistency within the other General
Plan elements, insofar as the Low Density Residential land use designation is the
most prevalent designation in the General Plan.
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, traffic and
water quality.
3. General Plan Compatibility. The proposed General Plan amendment will be
compatible with the surrounding designations in the project area, insofar as the
Low Density Residential designation is prevalent within Specific Plan 121-E, and
this project will continue this trend of development.
U 1'7
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso KS L-GPA078. W PD
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
General Plan Amendment 2001-078
KSL Development Corp.
4. Property Suitability. The property is well suited to residential development,
being primarily flat, and having adequate access to major roadways.
5. Change in Circumstances. The continued development of the City requires
residential dwelling units for new residents, 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 the Addendum to EIR #41
assessed the environmental concerns of the General Plan Amendment; and,
3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of General Plan
Amendment 2001-078 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 8th day of May, 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
G:\WPDO CS\PCReso KS L-G PAO78. W PD
1�.:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-078
APPROVED
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE
PROPOSED
GENERAL PLAN/LAND USE
50th - I AVENUE
3
= 1
G u19
W
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 ZONE CHANGE
FROM TOURIST COMMERCIAL TO LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL FOR SIX ACRES LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EISENHOWER DRIVE AND
AVENUE 50.
CASE NO.: ZC 2000-101
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8th day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL
Development Corporation for review of a Zone Change to change the zoning
designation on a six acres at the southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50,
more particularly described as:
APN's: 658-190-004, 773-020-033, 773-020-021, 773-020-034
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 on six acres of land from Tourist Commercial to
Low Density Residential. The proposed amendment is surrounded by
approximately 11 acres designated as Low Density Residential. The proposed
amendment maintains consistency within the other General Plan elements,
insofar as the Low Density Residential land use designation is the most
prevalent designation in the General Plan. 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, traffic and water
quality.
3. General Plan Compatibility. The proposed General Plan amendment will be
compatible with the surrounding designations in the project area, insofar as the
Low Density Residential designation is prevalent within Specific Plan 121-E, and
this project will continue this trend of development. 020
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSL-ZC101 MM "! 209
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Change of Zone 2001-101
KSL Development Corp.
4. Property Suitability. The property is well suited to residential development,
being primarily flat, and having adequate access to major roadways.
5. Change in Circumstances. The continued development of the City requires
residential dwelling units for new residents, 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:
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 the Addendum to EIR #41
assessed the environmental concerns of the Zone Change; and,
3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Zone Change 2001-101
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 8th day of May, 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
021.
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSL-ZC 101.WPD ' 01
ZONE CHANGE 2001-101
APPROVED ZONING
50th ' I A'
o .LDR
PROPOSED ZONING
50th - I AVENUE
U)R ;
o
� G �
N G
W
u22
202
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E
(AMENDMENT NO. 5) FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
INCLUDING RESIDENTIAL, GOLF COURSE, AND TOURIST
COMMERCIAL USES ON 622 ACRES, KNOWN AS THE LA
QUINTA RESORT AND CLUB
CASE NO. SP 121-E, AMENDMENT NO. 5
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORP.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 81h day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment No. 5, to allow a mixed use development including
residential, golf course and tourist commercial uses on 622 acres, generally bounded
by the Santa Rosa mountains on the west, Calle Tampico on the south, Coachella
Drive on the north and Desert Club (extended) on the east; and
WHEREAS, said Specific Plan has complied with the requirements of "The
Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended
(Resolution 83-63), in that an Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41 was
prepared for Specific Plan 121-E and found that although the proposed project will
have environmental impacts, all impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant
level; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify
a recommendation for approval of Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment No. 5:
1. That the proposed Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment No. 5 is consistent with
the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the proposed Low
Density Residential land use designation exists in the General Plan.
2. This Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public
health, safety, and welfare in that the single family residential development will
occur within an existing planned community and will be integrated into that
community.
3. That Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment No. 5 is compatible with the existing and
anticipated area development in that the project does not increase the total
number of units originally intended for development within the area.
Uti3
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSLSP1 21 -E#5.WPD 203
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment#5
KSL Development Corp.
4. That the project will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to
ensure public health and safety.
5. That the Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment No. 5 is consistent with the current
Specific Plan approval and amendment process.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby require compliance with the conditions of approval for the
proposed Specific Plan;
3. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that the Addendum to EIR #41
assessed the environmental concerns of this Specific Plan; and,
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Specific Plan 121-E,
Amendment #5 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 Council, held on this 81' day of May, 2001, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
u24
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, AMENDMENT #5 - KSL LAND DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
GENERAL
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 Specific Plan.
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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Applicant shall provide an easement of sufficient width to allow the
construction of a retaining wall to be extended from the applicant's retaining
wall adjacent to Eisenhower Drive.
5. Right of way dedications required of this development include:
GAWPDOCS\PCReso KSLSP 121 ECOA.WPD
U25
2U7,
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, AMENDMENT #5 - KSL LAND DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1 . Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 50-foot half of the 100-foot
right of way.
2. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - 50-foot half of the 100-foot right
of way, measured from the existing improvement construction
centerline.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
Residential (Street Lots A-F): 31-foot minimum width with roll -
type curb (providing minimum travel width of 28-feet, measured
gutter flow -line to gutter flow -line)• Right of way may be reduced
to 29-feet with vertical curbs. On -street parking is prohibited
provided and the applicant must make provision for ongoing
enforcement of the restriction.
2. Private Gated Entry: 82-feet or as required to provide adequate
egress and turn -around for non -admitted visitors, as approved by
the City Engineer.
3. Emergency Access (Lot G): 25-foot.
C. CULS DE SAC
1 . Public or Private: Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric)
or 800A (offset) with 39-foot radius for vertical curbs and 41-foot
radius for rolled curbs to provide travel radius of 38-feet measured
gutter flow -line to gutter flow -line, or larger.
6. 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.
7. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for the existing bus
turnout on Avenue 50.
8. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and
left turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved construction plans.
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSLSP121 ECOA.WPD
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, AMENDMENT 45 - KSL LAND DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. Projects disturbing 5 or more acres, or smaller
projects which are part of a larger project disturbing 5 or more acres require a
project -specific NPDES permit. The applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB
acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent (NOI) prior to issuance of
a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the
required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP) is available for
inspection at the project site.
9. 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.
10. 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. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial): 20-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.
1 1. 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.
LANDSCAPING
12. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, and park areas.
13. 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 they 7
G:\WPDOCS\PCRes0KSLSP121 ECOA.WPD r, ,7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, AMENDMENT #5 - KSL LAND DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
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.
14. 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
Prior to issuance of a grading permit or 30 days after City Council approval, whichever
occurs first, the Specific Plan shall be modified as follows:
15. The words "resort residential" shall be deleted from the first paragraph of page
2.16 of the Specific Plan.
16. Common area pool and clubhouse facility shall be listed separately in Table 2,
page 2.17 of the Specific Plan.
17. The Residential Development Standards table on page 3.10 shall be amended
to read Min. Lot Size: 6,000 s.f.
18. The Specific Plan shall be amended to include clubhouse buildings, subject to
Site Development Permit approval, in the permitted use section of Planning Area
II.
19. No signage is included in this Specific Plan approval. The applicant shall prepare
a master sign program for review and approval by the Planning Commission.
20, The landscaping palette (Table 8, page 2.59) shall be amended to include all
plants listed in the "Suggested Plant Material Palette -- La Quinta Resort and
Club/Esperanza Village."
21. All mitigation measures in Addendum to EIR #41 shall be incorporated into the
Specific Plan by this reference.
22. Prior to any earthmoving activities, the permanent employee parking facilities
located at Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas shall have been completed to
the satisfaction of the City, shall be fully accessible to La Quinta Resort and
Club employees, and shall have shuttle service established.
u28
GAWPDOCS\PCReso KSLSP121ECOA.WPD 2
0 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, APPROVING THE
DEVELOPMENT OF 65 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES
WITHIN THE LA QUINTA RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN,
#121-E, AMENDMENT #5
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-703
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8th day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL
Development Corporation to allow the construction of 65 single family homes on
17.82 acres within the La Quinta Resort Specific Plan area, more particularly described
as:
APN's 658-190-004, 773-020-033, 770-020-021, 773-020-034
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for the
City of La Quinta did, on the 2nd day of May, 2001 recommend approval of the
proposed project, by adoption of Minute Motion 2001-023, subject to conditions of
approval;
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending
approval of said Site Development Permit:
The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the General Plan
goals, policies and programs relating to the Low Density Residential land use
designation, and supports the development of a mix of residential land uses
within an established Specific Plan.
2. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the standards of the
Zoning Ordinance and is consistent with the La Quinta Resort Specific Plan, as
conditioned, which establishes development standards for the project. The
project, as conditioned meets the City's standards for height, landscaping and
land use.
3. The proposed Site Development 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.
u29
G A W PDO CS\PC ResoS DP703. W PD
Planning Commission Resolution 2000-
Site Development Permit 703
May 8, 2001
4. The proposed Site Development Permit, as conditioned, complies with the
architectural design standards for the La Quinta Resort Specific Plan (#121-E,
Amendment #5), and implements the development standards and design
guidelines included in that document.
5. The proposed Site Development Permit, as conditioned, is consistent with the
landscaping standards and palette in the La Quinta Resort Specific Plan and
implements the standards for landscaping and aesthetics established in the
General Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case; and
2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2001-703, for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval
attached hereto; and
3. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that the Addendum to EIR #41
assessed the environmental concerns of this Specific Plan.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8th day of May, 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 U 3 0
City of La Quinta, California ' r)
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoSDP703.WPD
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-703
MAY 8, 2001
1
The final landscaping plan shall include the following plant sizes:
Interior Street Trees
Accent Trees
Unit Screen Trees
Perimeter/Entry
Shrubs
Groundcover
Desertscape
Ocotillo
Vines
24" box minimum
24" box minimum
24;' box minimum
25' trunk height minimum
5 gal. Minimum
1 gal. Minimum
5 gal. Minimum
6' minimum
5 gal. Minimum
The perimeter wall shall be located a minimum of 20 feet from the edge of
the public right-of-way.
3. The perimeter wall shall be no more than 6 feet in height, finished with a
stucco finish, and articulated with pilasters at a minimum of 60 foot
intervals.
4. All changes to the Specific Plan which are also included in the Site
Development Permit shall be made to the latter to ensure consistency. The
project proponent shall submit amended documents within 30 days of City
Council approval or, issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first, of
the Specific Plan.
5. The landscaping plan shall include all frontages on City streets, and shall be
installed with the perimeter wall, as part of the first phase of construction on
the project site.
6. The home to be located on lot #16 shall be limited to one story, 22 feet in
height.
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
7. Grading and drainage plans shall be submitted to the District for review prior
to the issuance of grading permits.
8. The project proponent shall construct suitable facilities to limit access to the
La Quinta Evacuation Channel.
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSLsdp703COA.wpd �� i
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-703
MAY 8, 2001
9. 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.
10. The proposed project shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and
82 for sanitation service.
1 1 . Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to
the District for review for the purpose of ensuring efficient water
management.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
12. Approved standard fire hydrants, located at each intersection and spaced
330 feet apart with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a
hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 gpm, for a 2 hour duration at 20
psi.
13. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to
the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations.
14. Gate entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the travel
lanes serving that gate. Any gate providing access from a road to a driveway
shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway and shall open to
allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one-
way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 40-
foot turning radius shall be used.
15. Gates shall be equipped with a rapid entry system (KNOX). Plans shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation. Gate pins
shall be rated with a shear pin force, not to exceed 30 pounds. Gates
activated by the rapid entry system shall remain open until closed by the
rapid entry system.
16. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department
for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane
painting and/or signs.
17. Prior to any earthmoving activities, the permanent employee parking facilities
located at Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas shall have been completed
to the satisfaction of the City, shall be fully accessible to La Quinta Resort
and Club employees, and shall have shuttle service established.
U32
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSLsdp7O3COA.wpd
r
a�ly
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OF 17.82 ACRES
INTO 65 PARCELS AND A NUMBER OF LETTERED
LOTS.
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30125
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8th day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for KSL
Development Corporation, in order to subdivide a 17.82 acre parcel into 65 numbered
lots and a number of lettered lots, generally located at the southeast corner of
Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50, more particularly described as:
APN's: 658-190-004, 773-020-033, 773-020-021, 773-020-034
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 Tentative Tract Map 30125:
Finding Number 1 - Consistency with General Plan:
A. The property is designated Low Density Residential. The Land Use Element of
the General Plan encourages differing residential developments throughout the
City. The project is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La
Quinta General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2) insofar as Low Density
Residential development fits the character of the City's residential community.
Finding_Number 2 - Consistency with City Zoning Ordinance
A. The proposed 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 121-E, Amendment #5, are justified.
Finding Number 3 - Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act:
A. Tentative Tract Map 30125 is subject to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act per Public Resources Code Section 65457(a). An
Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41 has been prepared.
u U
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSLTT30125.WPD 213
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 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 Tentative Tract Map is consistent
with other parcels in the La Quinta Resort project.
Finding Number 5 - Site Improvements:
A. 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:
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 the Addendum to Environmental
Impact Report #41 assessed the environmental concerns of this Tentative Tract
Map; and,
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map
30125 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8th day of May, 2001, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
A4
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSLTT30125.WPD `�l1
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
A5
215
G AW PDOCS\PCReso KSLTT301 25. W PD
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30125
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
MAY 8, 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 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.
2. 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)•
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant
shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances
from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement
plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City
approval of the plans.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. Projects disturbing 5 or more acres, or smaller
projects which are part of a larger project disturbing 5 or more acres require a
project -specific NPDES permit. The applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB
acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent (NOI) prior to issuance of
a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the
required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP) is available for
inspection at the project site. u 3 b
G:\WPDO CS\PCReso KSLTT30125.WPD�
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
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.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
5. 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.
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. Applicant shall provide an easement of sufficient width to allow the
construction of a retaining wall to be extended from the applicant's retaining
wall adjacent to Eisenhower Drive.
8. Right of way dedications required of this development include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1 . Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 50-foot half of the 100-foot
right of way.
2. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - 50-foot half of the 100-foot right
of way, measured from the existing improvement construction
centerline.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1. Residential (Street Lots A-F): 31-foot minimum width with roll -
type curb (providing minimum travel width of 28-feet, measured
gutter flow -line to gutter flow -line). Right of way may be reduced
to 29-feet with vertical curbs. On -street parking is prohibited
provided and the applicant must make provision for ongoing
enforcement of the restriction.
2. Private Gated Entry: 82-feet or as required to provide adequate
egress and turn -around for non -admitted visitors, as approved by
the City Engineer.
u37
3. Emergency Access (Lot G): 25-foot. ^}
G:\WPDO CS\PCReso KSLTT30125.WPD �� /
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
C. CULS DE SAC
1 . Public or Private: Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric)
or 800A (offset) with 39-foot radius for vertical curbs and 41-foot
radius for rolled curbs to provide travel radius of 38-feet measured
gutter flow -line to gutter flow -line, 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. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for the existing bus
turnout on Avenue 50.
11. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and
left turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved construction plans.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. 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. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial): 20-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.
15. 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.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso KSLTT301 2 5.WPD
,. 213
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
16. 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 tentative map.
17. 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.
18. 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.
19. 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.
FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAPISI
20. 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.
21. 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. 039
r ,
G:\WPDOCS\PCResoKSLTT30125.WPD 2 1 9
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike
paths, entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally
include irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments.
"Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the
City Engineer.
22. 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.
23. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to
the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they
may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of
construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall
update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be
converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the
plans.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
24. 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.
25. 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) Q
I irg •J e
G:\WPDOCS\PC Reso KS LTT30125.WPD r
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
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.
26. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of
improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates
shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or
ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be
approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V.
cable improvements. However, development -wide improvements shall not be
agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the
telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone
service to lots within the development.
27. 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.
28. 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
29. Provide 2-foot wide flat areas between Lots 1-5 and 55-61 and the water
features adjacent to said lots for pedestrian traffic. The pedestrian walking area
should be adjacent to the lot lines.
30. Slopes adjacent to the golf course water features shall not exceed 3:1.
u4
G:\WPDOCS\PCReso KS LTT30125.WPD - 221
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May S, 2001
31. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, applicant shall submit written verification
of the Water Quality Control Board's acceptance of applicant's filing of the
Notice of Intent (N01) to comply with State and Federal NPDES regulations.
32. 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.
33. 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.
34. 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.
35. 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.
36. 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
37. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm
(the design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the
centerline of adjacent public streets.
38. Stormwater shall normally be retained in the golf course water features.
A2
G:\WPDOCS\PCReso KS LTT30125.WPD
2 '/ �a
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
39. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated,
unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route.
40. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on
site or passed through to the overflow outlet.
41. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in an approved method
42. 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.
If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make
provisions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations.
UTILITIES
43. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of
all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures
including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water
valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and
aesthetic purposes.
44. 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.
REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS
45. 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.
A3
GAW PDO CSTCReso KSLTT 3012 5.WPD
2`�3
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
46. Provide safety railing along the top of the retaining wall adjacent to Lot 53.
Safety railing shall be capable of providing for the safety of pedestrians and
occupants of golf carts.
47. 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. Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial)- Applicant shall comply with
the approved Condition of Approval, No. 10, Tentative Parcel Map
28334, which is worded as follows:
"As a condition of any final map or other land action allowing
development of any portion of this property, the following
minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform
with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
Eisenhower Drive (Primary Arterial) - 76' between curb faces with
a 12' raised median along the full frontage of this parcel map."
Condition to be amended to read: Applicant shall construct half
street improvement in compliance with the General Plan along the
full frontage of Eisenhower, comprising that portion of Tentative
Parcel Map 28334 and Tentative Tract Map 30125, to a point 60-
feet north of the southwest property corner of Tract 28334, Parcel
3. Applicant shall construct six foot meandering sidewalk and 12-
foot raised center median. Applicant will be reimbursed for the
cost of the median construction from the Transportation DIF in an
amount not to exceed the budget allowance for this median
construction.
Applicant shall enter a secured agreement for the cost of the half
street improvement from the point 60-feet north of the southwest
property corner of Tract 28334, Parcel 3, to the north terminus of
the future Eisenhower Drive bridge improvement.
2. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - Construct median modification to
allow left turn from Ave. 50. Construct 8-foot meandering
sidewalk from eastern end of bus shelter to the eastern property
boundary.
A4
G AWPDOCS\PCReso KSLTT30125. WPD
24 Y
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1 . Residential (Lots A-F): 28-foot travel width, minimum, measured
gutter flow -line to gutter flow -line. On -street parking shall be
prohibited and applicant will provide for perpetual enforcement of
the restriction by the homeowner's association.
2. Emergency Access (Lot G): Minimum 20-foot travel width,
measured gutter flow -line to gutter flow -line.
C. CULS DE SAC
1. Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A (offset)
with 38-foot curb radius, measured gutter flow -line to gutter flow -
line.
48. 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.
49 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).
50. 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.
51. Knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County
Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by
the City Engineer.
52. 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.
A5
GAWPDO CSTCReso KSLTT30125. W PD
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
53. 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
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"
The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the
time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete.
The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design
procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include
recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation
test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current
production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix
designs are approved.
54. The City will conduct final inspections of 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.
LANDSCAPING
55. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, and park areas.
56. 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 Enqineer.
G:\WPDO CS\PCResoKSLTT30125. W PD
AG
24
E
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
57. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn
or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets.
PUBLIC SERVICES
58. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline
Transit and approved by the City Engineer.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
59. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
60. 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.
61. 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.
62. 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
63. 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
64. 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. u 47
L
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
TTM 30125 - KSL Development Corp.
May 8, 2001
65. Prior to approval of a final map or completion of any approval process for
modification of boundaries of the property or lots subject to these conditions,
the applicant shall process a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s)
against the property and pay the cost of the reapportionment.
66. Prior to any earthmoving activities, the permanent employee parking facilities
located at Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas shall have been completed to
the satisfaction of the City, shall be fully accessible to La Quinta Resort and
Club employees, and shall have shuttle service established.
M
ATTACHMENT #1
MILES i AVENUE
PROJECT
`J
N
48th
H
W
AVENUE
SITE
N
o
50th
AVENUE
La
c
cz
i
�
W
u
52th
AVENUE
3
0
x
Z
W
N
LJ
54th
AVENUE
CASE MAP
CASE No.
u49
24
ATTACHMENT #3
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
May 2, 2001
2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff to identify the location of
to the mobile home park and across from the Hi School.
Committee Member Bobbitt asked what zoning was quired for a
church. Staff stated it could go anywhere with conditional use
permit. Committee Member Bobbitt state a concurred with
staff's recommendation.
3. Committee Member Cunningham st d they have a long way to
go architecturally before the buildi elevations could be approved.
The applicant needs to be mo 1 involved with the community
around where the building wi be built. He recognizes there may
be financial constraints, b they should obtain assistance from a
professional architect to dd be
to the building as this building
is within the public e
4. Comm/win
er Bobbitt stated he concurred. If they do not
want s, then some type of architectural style should
be adreet frontage.
5. Commers Cunningham stated this is not the typical
architthat has been approved in La Quinta.
6. T re being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
ommittee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2001-022 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-702, subject to the conditions as amended:
a. Condition #1 : replace the main gable roof with a hip roof.
b. Condition #6: 1.5 caliper size tree.
D. Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #4 and Site Development Permit 2001-
703; a request of R. C. Hobbs Company/KSL Company for review of
landscaping and architectural plans each with three facades, including
perimeter landscaping for a 17.82 acre site.
Planning Consultant Nicole Crist presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what the wall would consist of.
Mr. Hobbs, the applicant, stated it would be stuccoed. Committee
G:AWPDOCSVALRC5-2-Ol.wpd 3 i 150
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
May 2, 2001
Member Bobbitt stated his concern was that a "power wall", filled
with foam, would not allow vines to be attached. Mr. Forrest
Haag, landscape architect for the project, stated they used the
trellis at the La Quinta Resort instead of the conventional use of
screws.
3. Committee Member Cunningham stated that foam walls were not
allowed in Palm Desert.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt elaborated on the problems they have
with the "power wall" at PGA West. Mr. Hobbs noted they were
not on a zero lot, but had five foot setbacks which gave them
more room for landscaping.
5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked the height of the tower element.
Staff stated 22 feet as noted on the site plan. Committee Member
Bobbitt stated he liked the project.
6. Committee Member Cunningham stated he like the project.
7. Planning Manager Christie di lorio asked what the rear elevation
would look like as it will be seen from the street. Committee
Member Cunningham stated there was enough articulation that it
did not matter.
8. Committee Member Bobbitt stated his concern about the planting
of trees when there is not enough room for tree growth and how
they become a maintenance issue.
9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2001-022 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-703, subject to the conditions. Unanimously approved.
E. 1,S
jto Develo ment Permit 20 1- 93; a request of JR Properties for The
99 res for review of landscaping and architectural plans for a
shopping c including a 23,000 square foot store.
1. Planning Consu Nicole Criste presented the information
contained in the staff repQrt, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Dep ent.
2. Mr. Jeff Rothbard, representing JR Propertl tated they agreed
with Conditions #1-5. On Condition #6 they wou a to request
i151
G:AWPDOCSVALRC5-2-0I.wpd 4 - ���
PH #G
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: MAY 8, 2001
CASE NUMBERS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-421, GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-073, SPECIFIC PLAN 84-004
(AMENDMENT #4) AND AMENDMENTS TO PARCEL MAP
20469, AND TRACT MAPS 27840, 28343, 28640,
28912, 27952, 27952, 27835, 29403, 25154, 29457,
AND 29283
APPLICANTS: WATSON & WATSON ENGINEERING AND FORREST K.
HAAG, ASLA, INCORPORATED
PROPERTY OWNER: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
REQUESTS: RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF:
(1) MODIFICATION OF CHAPTER 7 (POLICY 7-1.4.3) OF
THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES ELEMENT
TO ALLOW AN EXEMPTION TO THE UNDER -GROUNDING
OF UTILITY LINES THAT ARE ATTACHED TO JOINT -USE
92 KV TRANSMISSION LINES (CITYWIDE); (2) ESTABLISH
NEW GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR OVERHEAD
UTILITY LINE UNDER -GROUNDING AND ADDING FIVE
ACRES TO THE MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY; (3)
AMEND THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THESE
SUBDIVISION MAPS TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT
TO UNDERGROUND OVERHEAD UTILITIES LINES ON 92
KILOVOLT TRANSMISSION LINES; AND (4) SUBDIVIDE
283 ACRES INTO 265 RESIDENTIAL AND OTHER
COMMON LOTS
LOCATION: BOUNDED BY AVENUE 48, AVENUE 50, JEFFERSON
STREET, AND WASHINGTON STREET WITHIN RANCHO LA
QUINTA COUNTRY CLUB; THE GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT APPLIES TO ALL PROPERTY WITHIN THE
CITY LIMITS
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-421 WAS
PREPARED FOR THE ABOVE -MENTIONED APPLICATIONS
SRPC SP004 Final Rancho - Greg T. 0 4/23;5/1 Page I of 5
L f 2
BACKGROUND:
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970,
AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDS THAT A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
BE CERTIFIED.
Previous City Council Review
At the February 15, 2000 City Council meeting, T. D. Desert Development requested
a waiver to the under -grounding of utility lines on high voltage power poles
surrounding Rancho La Quinta pursuant to Chapter 8.030 of the La Quinta Charter and
Municipal Code. The City Council, on a 5-0 vote, instructed the applicant to "prepare
and submit the necessary amendments for the Rancho La Quinta Specific Plan and
Tract Maps." See Attachment #1.
Project History
On June 1, 1999, the City Council adopted Resolution 99-73 approving a third
amendment to SP 84-004 that reduced the amount of Tourist Commercial acreage
from 40 to 10, and number of residential units to 1,300 located generally on the east
side of Washington Street, on the west side of Jefferson Street, on the north side of
50`h Avenue, and south side of 48`h Avenue. This Amendment also modified the on -
site street system and various graphic exhibits and tables (Attachment #2).
The Rancho La Quinta Specific Plan has established guidelines and standards for the
distribution of land uses, location and sizing of supporting infrastructure, development
standards, and requirements for public improvements.
Specific Plan 84-004 was amended on May 19, 1998, by adoption of City Council
Resolution 98-47, permitting 1,414 single family houses surrounding two 18-hole golf
courses and other Tourist Commercial activities.
In 1984, the City Council approved Specific Plan 84-004 (The Grovel and certified
Environmental Impact Report #90 allowing a mixed use development of residential,
golf and tourist commercial uses on approximately 682 acres.
Tentative Tract Map 29457 was approved by the City Council on January 4, 2000,
allowing development of approximately 277.9 acres into 262 single family lots on
private street adjacent to the existing golf course for property generally west of
Jefferson Street and south of Avenue 48 by adoption of Resolution 2000-02 on a 3-0
vote.
SRPC SP004 Final Rancho - Greg T. O 4/23;5/1 Page 2 of 5 0 12
Project Request
In addition to the Environmental Assessment, the following applications have been
filed:
General Plan Amendment to amend General Plan Policy 7-1.4.3 to allow all
existing utility lines attached to joint -use 92 Kv transmission power poles to be
exempt from under -grounding (i.e., citywide).
2. Specific Plan Amendment to modify the development standards and design
guidelines by adding five acres and modifying the under -grounding requirements
for utilities on joint -use 92 Kv transmission power poles (Attachments #3 and
#4). The total number of proposed residential units for the development is
unchanged. This Plan identifies four planning areas for development.
3. Various Parcel and Tract Map Amendments request to modify the City Council
Resolutions requiring high voltage overhead lines to be under -grounded.
4. Tract Map 29457 is being amended to add the new five acres for the ultimate
development of 265 residential and other common lots on 283 acres
(Attachment #5) for property generally west of Jefferson Street.
Public Notice
This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 16, 2001, and all
property owners within 500-feet of the affected area were mailed a copy of the public
notice. Additionally, property owners in the development were sent a copy of the
public hearing notice. To date, no written comments have been received.
Public Agency Review
This request was sent out for comments to City Departments and affected public
agencies in March and a copy of the public hearing notice was mailed in April to all
affected public utility agencies. Agency comments received have been made a part
of the Conditions of Approval.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings necessary to approve this request can be made and are contained in the
various attached Resolutions.
SRPC SP004 Final Rancho - Greg T. ® 4/23;5/1 Page)3 of 5 u V 3
G
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the following cases; and
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2000-073, subject to findings;
and
3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Specific Plan 84-004 (Amendment #4), subject to findings
and conditions; and
4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 29457 (Phases 1 and 2) and Tract 29457
(Amendment #1), subject to findings and conditions; and
5. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 27952 and Tract 27952 (Amendment #1),
subject to findings and conditions; and
6. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Parcel Map 20469, subject to findings and
conditions; and
7. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 27840, subject to findings and conditions;
and
8. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 28343, subject to findings and conditions;
and
9. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 28640, subject to findings and conditions;
and
10. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 28912, subject to findings and conditions;
and
SRPC SP004 Final Rancho - Greg T. 0 4/23;5/1 Page 4 of 5 U 0 4
11. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 27835, subject to findings and conditions;
and
12. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 29306, subject to findings and conditions;
and
13. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 25154, subject to findings and conditions;
and
14. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Amending Tract 29283, subject to findings and conditions.
Attachments:
1. 2-12-2000 City Council Minutes
2. SP 84-004 Land Use Map
3. Land Use Map
4. Land Use Summary Exhibit Map
5. TTM 29457 (3 pages)
6. Large Exhibits and SP Documents - Commission only
by:
Associate Planner
Submitted by:
Christine di lorio, Planni g Manager
SRPC SP004 Final Rancho - Greg T. ® 4/23;5/1
C
Page 5 of 5 U U
233
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 2001-421 PREPARED
FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-073, SPECIFIC
PLAN 84-004, AMENDMENT #4, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
29457, AMENDMENT #1, AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL FOR PARCEL MAP 20469 AND TRACT
MAPS 27840, 28343, 28640, 28912, 27952, 27835,
29306, 25154, 29457 AND 29283
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-421
APPLICANT: WATSON & WATSON ENGINEERING
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 8th of May, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for General Plan Amendment 2000-073,
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4, Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1,
Amendment to Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840,
28343, 28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 located
between Washington and Jefferson Streets, south of Avenue 50, in the City of La
Quinta; and
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 2001-421)
and has determined that although the proposed General Plan Amendment 2000-073,
Specific Plan 84-004 (Amendment #4), Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1,
Amendment to Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840,
28343, 28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-004
(Amendment #4), Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1, Amendment to
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343,
,�,j UU6
P:\GREG\PCResoRLQEA421.wpd L
28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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 2001-421.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-004
(Amendment #4), Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1, Amendment to
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343,
28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-004
(Amendment #4), Tentative Tract Map 29457( Amendment #1), Amendment
to Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840,
28343, 28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-004 -
Amendment #4, Tentative Tract Map 29457 (Amendment #1), Amendment to
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343,
28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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.
5. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-073, Specific Plan 84-004,
Amendment #4, Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1, Amendment to
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343,
28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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.
6. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may
have a significant effect on the environment.
7. The Planning Commission has considered the Environmental Assessment 2001-
P:\GREG\PCResoRLQEA421.wpd J
421 and the Environmental Assessment reflects the independent judgement of
the City.
8. 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).
9. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the
Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La
Quinta, California.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
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 2001-421 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 2001-421 reflects the independent judgement
of the City.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 8th day of May, 2001, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
F-11.1.1IFe1I i!;
STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\GREG\PC Reso RLQEA421. wpd
Environmental Checklist Form
1 . Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-
004, Amendment #4, Tentative Tract Map 29457,
Amendment #1, Amendment to Conditions of Approval for
Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343, 28640,
28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Greg Trousdell, 760-777-7125
4. Project Location: South side of Avenue 48, between Washington and
Jefferson Streets and to the north of Avenue 50. General
Plan Amendment is Citywide
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Watson & Christiansen Engineering
77682 Country Club Drive, Suite F2
Palm Desert, CA 92211
6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential, Golf and Tourist Commercial
7. Zoning: Low Density Residential, Golf Course and Tourist 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 to modify the current General Plan standard requiring
the undergrounding of utility lines. The Amendment would allow low voltage
lines on joint -use with 92kV lines to remain above ground. Specific Plan
amendment and Tentative Tract 29457 to add 5 acres to the existing project
site. Amendment to the Conditions of Approval on all other maps listed to allow
for overhead low voltage utility lines to remain on 92 Kv lines.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
Project is surrounded on all sides by streets. Beyond the streets:
North: Low Density Residential and Regional Commercial
South: Low Density Residential.
West: Low Density Residential and Golf Course
East: Riverside County lands, generally low density residential
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
P:ACEQAchecklistBA 01-421.wpd tt ((yy
participation agreement.)
11VCEQAchccklistEA 01-421nvpd �� T
21 �.
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by
the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Hazards and Hazardous Public Services
Materials
Agriculture Resources Hydrology and Water Quality Recreation
Air Quality Land Use Planning Transportation/Traffic
Biological Resources Mineral Resources Utilities and Service Systems
Cultural Resources Noise Mandatory Findings
Geology and Soils Population and Housing
Determination
(To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 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.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document
pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b)
have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
impose( upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Print Name
Date
CITY OF LA QUINTA
For
I-,
❑X
I-J
FN
VACGQAchecklistCA 01421.wpd U `
3
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers
that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the
parentheses following each question. A "No Impact' answer is adequately supported
if the 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.
8) The analysis of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question;
and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less
than significance.
P:\CEQAchecklistEA 01-421.wpd 4 o1 lo-
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 EIR, page 5-12 ff.)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application
materials)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
(Application materials)
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether
impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model prepared by the California Dept. Of Conservation as an
optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland) to 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)
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
KI
X
f:
X
E
X
X
7
2
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
U13
74A
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?
(Specific Plan Project Descr.)
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people? (Specific Plan Project Descr.)
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? (Master Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5-1)
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? (Master
Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.)
c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either
individually or in
combination with the known or probable impacts of other
activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means? (Master Environmental
Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
wildlife nursery sites? (Master Environmental Assessment, p.
5-2 ff.)
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? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5)
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing
on the National Register of Historic Places, the California
Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic
resources? (Historic/Archaeological Survey, CRM Tech,
March 2001)
X
X
X
0
FA
X
X
K4
X
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
u14
7s
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)? (Historic/Archaeological Survey, CRM Tech,
March 2001)
c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or
site? (Lakebed Delineation Map)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? (Historic/Archaeological
Survey, CRM Tech, March 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-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan 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 EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
iv) Landslides? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
(General Plan 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 18-1-B of
the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks
to life or property?
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)
X
X
3
X
0
M
K1
X
Q1
X
X
u1
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
M
Vill.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the
project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials? (Application Materials)
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous
materials into the environment? (Application Materials)
c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school? (Application Materials)
d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
(Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing)
e) For a 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 p. 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)
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? (General Plan EIR, page 4-
57 ff.)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
F2
X
X
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD I
8
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? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
to control? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.)
f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on
a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map
or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental
Assessment 6-13)
g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental
Assessment 6-13)
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan
Project Description)
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 coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
(Master Environmental Assessment 2-11)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural communities conservation plan? (Master
Environmental Assessment 5-5)
X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would
be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
(Master Environmental Assessment 5-29)
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general
plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master
Environmental Assessment 5-29)
XI. NOISE: Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
(General Plan EIR, p. 4-157 ff.)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General
Plan EIR, p. 4-157 ff.)
X
X
X
X
X
X
94
9
KI
X
24^
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD q
9 Ua
c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? (General Plan EIR, p. 4-157 ff.)
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? (MEA, p. 6-15 ff.)
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? (MEA, p. 6-15 ff.)
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)
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. I
XIV. RECREATION
X
X
X
3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
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) X
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD U ` 8
10 2r`?
XV
XVI.
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)
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)? (Application materials)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
(Application materials)
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)? (Application materials)
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)
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General
Plan MEA, page 4-24 )
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 )
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)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
7
X
X
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
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.
EI
X
3
X
U
U
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one
or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets.
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
Environmental Impact Report #90 was used the preparation of this report.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
Not applicable.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project.
See attached Addendum.
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
12
SOURCES:
Master Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 1992.
SCAQMD CEQA Handbook.
General Plan, City of La Quinta, 1992.
City of La Quinta Municipal Code
Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Five Acre Addition to Rancho La Quinta, CRM
Tech, March 2001
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
13
Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2001-421
a) & c)
The General Plan Amendment proposes to allow utility lines which currently
occur on poles which carry 92 kV lines to remain on those poles, as the 92 kV
lines are not required to be under -grounded. The other utility lines could include
other lower -voltage electrical lines, telephone, cable television and similar
providers. The poles are generally located in or adjacent to the public right of
way of major roadways in the City. Many of these roadways are also designated
Image Corridors in the General Plan.
The electrical poles which carry 92 kV lines would remain under current General
Plan regulations, since they are too costly to underground, and are not required
to be undergrounded by City policy. The only change to the aesthetic
environment which would occur with the proposed amendment is that the
additional wires, which occur at a lesser height than the 92 kV lines, would
remain. The amendment also proposes the use of landscaping to help to lessen
the impact of these lines on the visual environment. Finally, since the greatest
visual impact of these lines is the poles on which they occur, not the utility lines
themselves, and since the poles would remain to carry the 92 kV lines
regardless of the General Plan Amendment, and since the addition of
landscaping would be included in the General Plan Amendment, the impact to
the aesthetics along Image Corridors is not expected to be significant.
Ill. c) & d)
The proposed Tract Map Amendment will create seven residential lots and one
retention basin lot on a five -acre parcel. The primary impacts to air quality from
these lots will be from mobile emitters. The trips generated by seven residential
lots will not be significant, nor will the trips generated for the maintenance of
the well site.
The Coachella Valley is a non -attainment area for PM10 (particulate matter of
10 microns or smaller). Dust will be created by the proposed project during
construction. In order to control PM10, the City has imposed standards and
requirements on development to control dust. These are integrated into the
following mitigation measures:
1. No earth moving activity shall be undertaken without the review and
approval of a PM10 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.
(122
P:\GREG\EA 421 Adden Rancho.WPD
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 ongoing basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site.
Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered
regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall
be watered at the end of each work day.
8. All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion until the site is
constructed upon.
9. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of
construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site.
10. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage
ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
1 1 . All residences on the project site shall conform to energy use guidelines
in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code.
With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality
from the proposed project will not be significant. Moreover, improvements in
technology which are likely to reduce impacts, particularly from motor vehicles
or 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) The proposed project occurs within the fee payment area of the Coachella
Valley Fringed -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan (CVFTL HCP). The
proposed project also occurs in a blowsand hazard area. The project site may
U�
P:\GREG\EA 421 Adden Rancho.WPD 9 C
J1:
be habitat for the Coachella Valley Fringed -toed lizard. The California
Department of Fish and Game has declared that since it was not a signatory to
the CVFTL HCP, it is currently requiring mitigation for this species as required
by CESA. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation
measure shall be implemented:
1 . Prior to the issuance of grading permits on the 5-acre addition to Specific
Plan 84-004, the project proponent shall complete, or cause to be
completed, a biological resource analysis on the subject property. Such
a study shall be undertaken by a qualified biologist, utilizing protocols
established for the Fringed -toed Lizard. The biological analysis shall
include a final report, to be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval. The report shall include mitigation
measures, if required should the species be present on site.
V. b) A cultural resource survey and testing program was conducted for the subject
property'. The survey found no resources on the site. The project archaeologist
does recommend, however, that given the high occurrence of significant sites
in the City, it is possible that buried artifacts could be encountered during the
construction process. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the Historic
Preservation Commission recommends the following mitigation measure shall
be implemented:
1 . A qualified archaeological monitor shall be present during all earth moving
and grading activities. The monitor shall be empowered to stop or
redirect activities on the site should a resource be identified. A final
report shall be filed with the Community Development Department prior
to issuance of building permits for the first production residence in Tract
29457.
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 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.
VI. b) & c)
The proposed project site is composed primarily of sandy soils, and is located
in a blowsand hazard area. Sandy soils must be properly compacted prior to
Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey, prepared by CRM Tech, March 2001.
P:\GREG\EA 421 Adden Rancho.WPD
u 2 4
2 5 ,7,
construction to assure long-term stability. The City Engineer will be required to
review excavation and compaction plans for the proposed project site prior to
the issuance of grading permits. The following mitigation measure will be
required in order to reduce the impacts of unstable soils on the proposed site:
1 . Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent 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. d) & f)
The proposed project, through the construction of residential units, will create
impermeable surfaces, which will change drainage patterns in a rain event. The
project site is located in Flood Zone A. The project will be required to meet the
City's standards for retention of the 100-year storm on -site, and to address on -
site flooding potential during a 100-year storm. 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.
XI. a) & c)
The proposed Tract Map Amendment is located in an area which currently
meets the City's noise standards. The addition of seven housing units and a
well site are not expected to generate excessive noise levels, and the impacts
to surrounding existing sensitive receptors is not expected to be significant in
the long term. The construction of the well site and seven residences will
create short term noise impacts to the surrounding existing sensitive receptors.
In order to ensure that these impacts are mitigated, the following shall be
implemented:
1 . All construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the
La Quinta Municipal Code.
2. Construction staging areas shall be located as far from existing residential
development as possible.
3. Prior to the initiation of well drilling activities, the Coachella Valley Water
District shall complete the construction of a wall around the drilling site,
to reduce noise levels emanating from the drilling activity.
P:\GREG\EA 421 Adden Rancho.WPD
vC
^
Fl-
)
/
j
/
\
Q
\
\
/
)
\
§
\
�
$
(
\
(
\
\
.
_
2
}
�
�
�
z
«
)
■
�
k
\:j
m
®
4{
(
/
\}\
§J\eggz2»
\
4
)/\)�)\\\
2
Cd
—§
§
E�
\
_
2
e�e,wmw
m
b
/
2242a*g&e
3
Q
)
}
\
/
)
\
\
/
\
�
w
§
_
)j
\�
/
)
§
a/
u
\/
�w
K
{
2
\(
�
eo
�
�
�
§E
=2
�
,(
c�
�°§
\
)
\\§
(
\
}
\
257\
U2G`
W
F
a
a
�
U
d CWa
O
V U
U
b
.U.
O
a
b
b
b
tVJ
U
7
V
V
V
N
ti
O N
O
Y
O N
O C-0
a a a
a
a
as
a a.P. u
O �
C y
aoi
�
c4
o
W
bA Gy U
U
bA
CA
C-0
O C�
U �1 U
U
U
U
oa
U p
z
a
O
r-'
/-
L'
fC
'b
N
�
(❑❑y
W
F
a
a
zU �
d
rCG�a
Fa. V
O
U U
a
W
U
°
F
ry
O
w
Ca
U
5
�o
C7
w
0
r+
OJ
V
IH
F
f6
vOi
ti
0
O
a a
O �
N
wz
�
C
o
oz
Q
m
U Ca
b
°
0
z
o
w
�
d
�
w
W d
a'n
� w
N
\
\gz
\�
j
;
2
°
\\(
3;R
�
2
§
�
�
)
j
/k
)
(\
36
§
\
§
�§
}
[/
/\
/ ){
;
)\
¥ 2
\
u)
\§
\
§
/\
2
u
\},
z«
\\}\\
&%&4Q
E?
_
\/
\
§
\\
\
\e
c
#
=e
&
\
\�
;
\�
i
�
/
\
/
$
,
§
� )
\E
)/
/k
§
/
»
S
(
\
a
_
t
u
\ �
\
�
••
}
\�
;
\�
/
¢
§
_
/ ) /
_
$
{ )
§
/ /
e
\
))
2 y
/ / )
(
cj
{ \ \
[b
$\
! \
\\ \
)
§
\
\
\
\
U�
zb9
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 GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT TO MODIFY GENERAL PLAN POLICY 7-1.4.3
TO ALLOW EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES TO
REMAIN ON TRANSMISSION LINES OF 92 KILOVOLTS
ALONG ARTERIAL STREETS IN THE CITY
CASE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-073
APPLICANT: T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 81h day of May, 2001, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending the City of La Quinta General Plan Infrastructure and Public Services Element
(Policy 7-1 .4.3) to allow existing overhead utility lines to remain on joint -use 92 Kv
transmission lines adjacent to Arterial Streets in the City of La Quinta.
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 pursuant to Section
9.230.020 of the Zoning Ordinance to justify a recommendation for approval of said
General Plan Amendment:
1 . The proposed Amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies
of the General Plan Circulation Element which defines the design standards for
the primary circulation system for the City stating that vertical landscaping (i.e.,
palms) shall be used with trees to create landscape themes on Image Corridors
to reduce the visibility of overhead transmission lines.
2. The proposed Amendment is consistent with the policies of the City to allow
high voltage lines to remain along arterial thoroughfares it that maintenance
costs in the long term will be less for IID and its contractors.
3. The proposed change to allow the existing overhead utility lines to remain in
place does not change the visual character of the City in that the high voltage
lines would exist regardless of this proposed change.
4. Approval of the Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to
the public health, safety, and general welfare in that the utility lines already
exist and where installed to state and federal standards and requirements.
5.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case; and
A:ARESOPC GPA73 Rancho.wpd - Greg
U30
261
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
General Plan Amendment 2000-073 (City-wide)
May 8, 2001
Page 2
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Mitigated Negative Declaration on file with the Community Development
Department; and
3. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described General Plan
Amendment request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution per attached
Exhibit "A."
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 81h day of May, 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
v3].
A
A:ARESOPC GPA73 Rancho.wpd - Greg
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-073
EXHIBIT "A"
Existing General Plan Policy (7-1.4.3)
The City shall require the under -grounding of all existing and proposed overhead electric
lines, less than 12.5 kilovolts, to enhance the visual quality of the City.
Proposed General Plan Policy (7-1.4.3)
The City shall require the under -grounding of all existing and proposed overhead electric
lines, less than 12.5 kilovolts, to enhance the visual quality of the City. All existing utility
lines attached and parallel to joint -use 92 Kv transmission power lines are exempt from the
under -grounding requirement. Should under -grounding costs become conductive in the
future for high voltage transmission lines, the City, in conjunction with other public agencies
and private property owners, shall explore ways to remove the overhead lines from Image
Corridors through such methods as an assessment district, etc. Until removal can take place,
vertical landscaping shall be installed outside the utility easement corridor to screen the
power poles and guyed wires pursuant to the policies prescribed in Chapter 2 (Circulation
Element) of the General Plan.
A2
263
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 84-004
(AMENDMENT NO. 4) FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
CONSISTING OF A COMBINATION OF RESIDENTIAL, GOLF
COURSE, AND TOURIST COMMERCIAL USES ON 723
ACRES, GENERALLY BOUNDED BY WASHINGTON
STREET, JEFFERSON STREET, AVENUE 48, AND AVENUE
50)
CASE NO. SP 84-004, AMENDMENT NO. 4
APPLICANT: T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8" day of May, 2001, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider
Specific Plan Amendment No.4 to allow a mixed use development consisting of a
combination of residential, golf course, tourist commercial and retail uses on 723
acres, generally bounded by Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Avenue 48, and
Avenue 50; and
WHEREAS, said Specific Plan has complied with the requirements of
"The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as
amended (Resolution 83-63), in that an Environmental Assessment was conducted for
Specific Plan 84-004 (Rancho La Quintal in 1998, for the overall development of the
Rancho La Quinta Country Club. A Mitigated Negative Declaration to the Addendum
to Environmental Impact Report No. 90 was certified by the City Council (Resolution
98-47) on May 19, 1998.
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 2001-421)
and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant adverse
impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed.
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings of approval to justify
a recommendation for approval of said Specific Plan Amendment No. 4:
A:\resoPC SP84-004amdo.4 U 3 J
26"
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4
Rancho La Quinta CC
May 8, 2001
1 . That the proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 4 is consistent with the goals
and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the proposed land use
designations of Residential, Golf Course/Open Space, and Tourist Commercial
are allowed General Plan uses.
2. This Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public
health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses and circulation will
require Planning Commission and City Council review and approval of future
development plans, which will ensure adequate conditions of approval.
3. That the Specific Plan Amendment No. 4 is compatible with the existing and
anticipated area development in that the project, as conditioned, provides
adequate site access and off site street improvements.
4. That the project will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to
ensure public health and safety.
5. That the Specific Plan Amendment No-4 is consistent with the current Specific
Plan approval and amendment process.
6. That the proposed Specific Plan Amendment No. 4 is conceptual; further review
will be required under a Site Development Permit review process at which time
project related conditions will be attached to mitigate impacts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Addendum on file with the Community Development Department; and
3. That it does hereby approve the above -described Specific Plan Amendment
request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
u34
A:VesoPC SP84-004amdo.4 267
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4
Rancho La Quinta CC
May 8, 2001
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Council, held on this 81h day of May, 2001, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
u35
A:\resoPC SP84-004amdo.4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 84-004, AMENDMENT NO. 4
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1 . Land divisions within Specific Plan 84-004 (Amendment #4) shall comply with
the requirements and standards of § § 66410-66499.58 of the California
Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta
Municipal Code (LQMC).
2. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permits for any facilities
contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or
clearances from the following departments or 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 (Potable water supply and work within the
La Quinta Evacuation Channel)
• Imperial Irrigation District
• California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances
from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement
plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City
approval of the plans.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES
construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the
Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance
of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the
proposed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works
Department.
3. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's
adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
kl3G
COA.SP84-004AMDA04
�U�
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 2
PROPERTY RIGHTS
4. All easements, rights of way and other property rights required of or otherwise
necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and functioning of
improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the process
of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of
final maps or parcel maps or a waivers of parcel maps lying over or adjacent to
the required property rights. The conferral shall include irrevocable offers to
dedicate or grant easements to the City for access to and maintenance,
construction, and reconstruction of all essential improvements which are located
on privately -held lots or parcels.
5. Prior to approval of final maps, parcel maps or grading plans and prior to issuance
of grading permits, the applicant shall furnish proof of temporary or permanent
easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting
properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or
other encroachments are to occur.
6. 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.
7. The applicant shall 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 grants required of this development include:
A. Washington and Jefferson Streets - Sixty -foot halves of 120' rights of way
B. Avenues 48 and 50 - Fifty -five-foot halves of 1 10' rights of way
Grants shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left
turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved
construction plans.
COA.SP84-004AMD.N04 2
u3�
26
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 3
The applicant shall grant the above rights of way withing sixty days of written
request by the City.
9. The applicant shall grant flood easements to CVWD for all areas of the
development below the elevation of 50.00 feet which are not drainage isolated
Ito elevation 50.00) from the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. The applicant shall
endeavor to offer easements over currently -improved portions of the channel
within six months of the approval of this specific plan update. Easements over
unimproved portions shall be offered for dedication when subdivided or otherwise
approved for construction.
10. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot public utility easements contiguous with and
along both sides of all private streets.
1 1 . The applicant shall create perimeter setback lots, of minimum width as noted,
adjacent to the following street rights of way:
A. Washington Street - As constructed at the time of this Specific Plan update
B. Avenues 48 and 50 and Jefferson Street - 20 feet.
Minimum widths may be used as average widths if meandering wall designs are
approved.
Required setback areas or lots shall apply to all existing and proposed street
frontage of the property being subdivided including, but not limited to, remainder
parcels and lots dedicated or deeded to others such as water well and power
substation sites.
Where public sidewalks are placed on privately -owned setback lots, the applicant
shall dedicate blanket sidewalk easements over the setback lots.
12. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to Washington and Jefferson
Streets and Avenues 48 and 50 from lots abutting the streets. Direct access to
these streets shall be restricted to entry/exit drives approved by the City.
COA.SP84-004AMD.N04 3
038
90
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 4
13. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and
access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park
lands, and common areas.
FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(Sl
14. Prior to approval of any land division map, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on
storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files
shall utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into
a basic AutoCad program.
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
15. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on
24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading,"
"Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans
shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have
signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official.
Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike
paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are
included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional
signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined
plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's
signature.
"Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation,
lighting, and perimeter walls.
COA.SP84-004AMD.NO4 4
v39
r•1 L
r� 3f )
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 5
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
16. Grading and drainage plans within or directly affecting the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel shall have signature blocks for CVWD.
17. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant
may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City.
18. When final plans are approved by the City, and prior to approval of the land
division map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete,
approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall
utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic
AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final
acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -
constructed conditions including approved revisions to the plans.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be
converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the
plans.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
19. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish
executed, secured agreements to construct improvements and/or satisfy
obligations required by the City prior to approval of final or parcel maps or
issuance of certificates of compliance for waived parcel maps. 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.
COA.SP84-004AMD.NO4 5
u40
1
- �r�
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 6
20. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of
improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs
adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's
schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside
agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for
telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall
not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from
the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone
service to lots within the development.
21. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for
applicant's required share of improvements which are or have been constructed
by others (participatory improvements).
At the time of approval of this specific plan update, known participatory
improvements consist of the following:
Avenue 48 - Reimburse the A.G. Spanos Company in the amount of $60,555.59
for pavement and median curbing installed on the south side of Avenue 48
between Washington and Adams Streets as part of offsite improvements for
Tract 24230 - Lake La Quinta. This amount shall be reduced by the applicant's
approved costs for installation of landscaping in the north half of said median.
GRADING
22. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand
nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with
other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments.
23. Prior to occupation of development sites for construction purposes, the Applicant
shall submit and receive approval of Fugitive Dust Control plans prepared in
accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. In accordance with said Chapter, the
Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount
sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit.
Al
COA.SP84-004AMD.NO4 6
21?
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment k4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 7
24. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. The
applicant shall coordinate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency's
National Flood Insurance Program and take steps as necessary to ensure that
residential properties abutting the La Quinta Evacuation Channel are not subject
to the flood insurance associated with the Flood Zone A designation of the
Channel.
25. The applicant shall furnish a thorough preliminary geological and soils engineering
report ("soils report") with grading plans.
26. Grading plans shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the
approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The grading
plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report(s) and shall be
certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement
shall appear on final map(s) that soils reports have been prepared pursuant to
Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code.
27. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at the interface
of this development with abutting properties and of 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, but not sharing
common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If
compliance with this requirement is impractical, the City will consider and may
approve alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties
and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
28. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide documents,
bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor,
that list actual building pad elevations for the building lots. The document shall
list the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the
difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by map and lot
number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
30. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03
and the following:
COA.SP84-004AMD.N04 .7 U /A� 2
/
e `Li / 3
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 8
31, The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
32. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm
(the design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the
centerline of adjacent public streets.
33, Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated
overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route.
34. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
35. Nuisance water shall be retained on -site.
36. If the applicant proposes drainage of stormwater from a design storm directly or
indirectly to public waterways, the applicant and, subsequently, the
Homeowners' Association shall be responsible for any sampling and testing of the
development's effluent which may required under the City's NPDES Permit or
other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program and for any other
obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge of the
development's stormwater or nuisance water. The tract CC & R's shall reflect
the existence of this potential obligation.
UTILITIES
37.
shall be undergiretind. evver which
All
existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development
shall be installed underground, unless otherwise allowed by General Plan
Amendment 2000-073.
38. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground
utilities shall be installed prior to the hardscape improvements. The applicant
shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of
the City Engineer.
COA.SP84-004AMD.NO4 8
u4''
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 9
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
39. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement
program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map
or issuance of a certificate of compliance for any waived final map, the land
being divided may be subject to the provisions of the ordinance.
40. The applicant shall develop all internal roads in accordance with the design
standards specified in the specific plan and the structural standards in effect at
the time of tentative tract approval. All internal roads shall remain private. The
minimum street width shall be 36 feet as measured between curbfaces or
flowlines except as follows:
A. Single -loaded residential streets - 32-feet minimum.
B. Streets may be constructed to minimum widths of 32 feet with parking
restricted to one side, and 28 feet if on -street parking is prohibited, if there
is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors and the applicant
provides for enforcement of the restrictions by the homeowners association
The following minimum off -site street improvements shall be constructed to
conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
C. Washington Street and the portion of Avenue 48 from Washington Street
to Dune Palms Road have been constructed by the applicant at the time of
this Specific Plan Amendment.
D. Avenue 48 (Primary Arterial) - Reimburse the City for the cost to construct
the applicant's half of this street from Dune Palms Road to Jefferson Street.
E. Jefferson Street (Major Arterial) - Fifty -one -foot half of 102 feet
improvement (curbface to curbface) plus six-foot sidewalk for the length of
the applicant's frontage.
F. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - Forty -three-foot half of 86 feet improvement
(curbface to curbface) plus six-foot sidewalk for the length of the
applicant's frontage.
COA.SP84-004AMD.N04 9 U 4 4
f / „3
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 10
G. Traffic signal at Jefferson Street and Avenue 48 - 25% responsibility for
the cost to design and construct.
H. Traffic signals on Avenue 48 at Adams Street, at Dune Palms Road - 50%
responsibility for the cost to design and construct.
Traffic signal at Avenue 50 entrance - 50% responsibility for the cost to
design and construct.
J. Traffic Signal at Jefferson Street and Avenue 48 - 50% responsibility for
the cost to design and construct.
The Applicant shall be solely responsible for any modifications required to adapt
existing signals for the opening of this developments entries. Signals shall be
secured (reimbursed if already constructed by others) with development
approvals for the entries affected and shall be constructed prior to the opening
of the entries unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
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.
In the event any of the above improvements are constructed by the City prior to
the Applicant recording a final map pursuant to the phasing concept approved for
this Specific Plan, the Applicant shall reimburse the City, at the time the final
map is approved by the City Council, for the cost of that portion of the
improvements constructed by the City at City expense that are required by these
Conditions of Approval.
41. The minimum rate of progress on the applicant's remaining responsibility for off -
site streets (approximately 2.1 of the original 3.1 miles of improvements) shall
be as follows:
A. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the cost of improvements to
Avenue 48 between Dune Palms Road and Adams Street at the time of
approval of the next final map or other development approval providing
additional residential or resort guest property.
B. The applicant shall secure the estimated cost of Jefferson Street
improvements (or reimburse actual costs if already constructed) as follows:
u 4 5
COA.SP84-004AMD.NO4 10 7 in
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 11
1) Prior to construction of permanent, non -emergency access to this
street, or
2) At the time of approvals allowing residential or resort guest uses in the
portion of the specific plan area lying within one quarter mile of the
centerline of Jefferson Street. This obligation may be pro rated with
development approvals for the first 80 percent of such property within
that area until permanent non -emergency access is provided to
Jefferson Street or the City Engineer determines that improvements
are needed, in part, because of traffic generated by the specific plan
area.
3) Construction or reimbursement shall be complete prior to approval of
the final 20 percent of the residential or resort guest acreage within
this area.
C. The applicant shall secure the estimated cost of Avenue 50 along
applicant's frontage and Avenue 48 between Dune Palms Road and
Jefferson Street (or reimburse actual costs if already constructed)
concurrently with approvals allowing residential or resort guest uses in the
portion of the specific plan area lying east and south of the La Quinta
Evacuation Channel and more than one -quarter mile west of the centerline
of Jefferson Street.
The provision of security and construction/reimbursement of these
improvements shall comply with the provisions listed above for Jefferson
Street improvements except that reimbursement for the Avenue 48
improvements shall precede securing/constructing Avenue 50 improvements
until the pro rata contributions are needed for pending construction of
Avenue 50 improvements.
The above notwithstanding, off -site street improvements determined necessary
to serve developing portions of the specific plan area shall be secured or
reimbursed at the time of approval of those portions of the development and shall
be constructed concurrently with those portions. All off -site street improvements
COA.SP84-004AMD.NO4 11
217
u4i�
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 12
shall be completed no later than five years after the approval of this Specific Plan
unless otherwise approved by the City Council. Improvements and
reimbursements so required may exceed the minimum rate of progress outlined
above.
42. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization
markings and devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, and
sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required.
43. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development
boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street
width transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly
constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and
conform with the City's standards and practices.
44. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be
prepared by registered professional engineer(s) authorized to practice in the State
of California. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance
with the LQMC, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and
Specifications, the specific plan, and as approved by the City Engineer.
45. Street right of way geometry for culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs
shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805
respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
46. All streets proposed to serve residential or other access driveways shall be
designed and constructed with vertical curbs and gutters or shall have other
approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding and to facilitate
street sweeping.
47. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for a 20-year life
and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and
building construction traffic)•
COA.SP84-004AMD.NO4 12
A7
2 1,3
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 13
The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows:
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
The listed structural sections are minimums, not defaults. Street pavement
sections shall be designed using Caltrans design procedures with site -specific
data for soil strength and traffic volumes.
The applicant shall submit current (no more than two years old) mix designs for
base materials, Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, including
complete mix design lab results, for review and approval by the City. For mix
designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (no more than six
months old at the time proposed for construction) aggregate gradation test
results to confirm that the mix design gradations can be reproduced in production
of the base or paving material. Construction operations shall not be scheduled
until mix designs are approved.
48. Final inspection and occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the
development will not be approved until the homes or permanent buildings have
improved access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include
streets and sidewalks, traffic control devices and street name signs.
WALLS AND LANDSCAPING
48. Final inspection and occupancy of homes and buildings within tracts abutting the
perimeter will occur only after the perimeter wall has been constructed adjacent
to those tracts. Perimeter walls along public streets shall be installed within one
year of the applicants' construction or participation in the costs of the streets.
50. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback
areas or lots along all adjacent public streets. Landscape improvements shall
coincide with construction of the adjacent perimeter wall unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer.
COA.SP84-004AMD.NO4 13
27 0
AS
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 14
51. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas,
medians, and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development
Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to
the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The
plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed
by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside
County Agricultural Commissioner.
52. 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.
53. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn
or spray irrigation within 5-feet of curbs along public streets.
54. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated
to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures.
PUBLIC SERVICES
55. The applicant shall provide public transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit
and/or the City Engineer.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
56. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
57. The subdivider shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and
testing not performed by the City but necessary to provide evidence that
materials and their placement comply with plans and specifications.
58. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers,
geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have
their agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to
be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings.
AO
COA.SP84-004AMD.NO4 �,
14 u�3II
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 15
59. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet
of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -
Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the
engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant
shall revise the plan computer files previously submitted to the City to reflect the
as -constructed condition.
MAINTENANCE
60. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous and perpetual maintenance of
all required improvements unless and until expressly released from said
responsibility by the City.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
61. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan
checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those
in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits.
62. Fringe -Toed Lizard mitigation fees in effect at the time of permit issuance, shall
be paid.
FIRE MARSHALL
63. All water mains and fire hydrants providing required water flows shall be
constructed in accordance with the appropriate sections of CVWD Std. W-33,
subject to the approval by the Riverside County Fire Department.
64. The Homeowner's Association or appropriate community service district shall be
responsible for the maintenance of vegetation in the open space areas.
65. All roads need to be a minimum of 20 feet unobstructed width.
66. Specific access plans shall be submitted with each subdivision map application.
Cul-de-sac street lengths shall be allowed to exceed 660 feet in length
(Subdivision Ordinance Street design Section 13.24.060 F) upon approval of the
Public Works Department and Fire Marshal.
obi
COA.SP84-004AMD.N04 15 ,� Ui
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Page 16
MISCELLANEOUS
67. Applicant shall work with staff to correct internal document inconsistencies prior
to final publication of Specific Plan document. The final Conditions of Approval
shall be incorporated in the Final Specific Plan document (8 copies).
68. Prior to the issuance of grading permits on the 5-acre addition to Specific Plan
84-004, the project proponent shall complete, or cause to be completed, a
biological resource analysis on the subject property. Such a study shall be
undertaken by a qualified biologist, utilizing protocols established for the Fringed -
toed Lizard. The biological analysis shall include a final report, to be submitted to
the Community Development Department for review and approval. The report
shall include mitigation measures, if required should the species be present on
site.
69. Prior to issuance of any grading permit, mitigation measures as recommended by
the Archaeological Reports for the site shall be implemented at the
applicant/developer's expense. This consists of having an archaeological monitor
on -site during grading and earth disturbance operations and/or trenching.
70. The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the
City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the
City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment
#4), GPA 2001-073, EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City of
La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion.
u51
COA.SP84-004AMD.N04 16 . )
GJ2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING TRACT MAP 29457
(PHASES 1 AND 2) AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
29457 (AMENDMENT #1) TO ALLOW A CHANGE
TO CONDITION #36 OF CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2000-02 REQUIRING UNDER
GROUNDING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINES
FOR A 265-LOT IN RANCHO LA QUINTA (SPECIFIC
PLAN 84-004)
CASE NOS.: AMENDING TRACT MAP 29457 (PH. 1 AND 2)
AND TTM 29457, AMENDMENT #1
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 81h day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 36 of City Council Resolution 2000-02 (See Condition #38)
to allow an exemption to the under grounding of existing overhead utility lines on
Imperial Irrigation District high voltage power lines (92 Kv) for a subdivision of 283
acres into 265 single family and other common lots, located on the south side of 48`h
Avenue and west of Jefferson Street in Rancho La Quinta with connections to Tracts
29283 and 29306; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 41h day of January, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving the
subdivision of a 277.9 acres into 262 single family and other common lots, located on
the south side of 48`h Avenue and west of Jefferson Street, more particularly
described as:
Being a subdivision of Parcels 12, 14, 15, and 17 of Parcel Map 20469
and portions of Parcels 6, 7, 9-11, 13, 18, and 19 of PM 20469;
Section 32, T5S, R7E, SBBM
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 t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-
421) and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant
RESOPCTT29457 - Greg ".
u5�.
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract 29457 (Phase 1 and 2) and TTM 29457, Amendment #1
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings:
A. The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the
General Plan Update allowing a density of 2 to 4 units per acre; therefore,
provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan 84-004
designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single family
dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 29457 is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum).
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure improvements in the project conform
to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as
designed. Private streets provide access to all lots and connect to off -site
streets in Tracts 27835 and 29283. The density and design standards for the
tract will comply with the Land Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2) and
the Specific Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
RESOPCTT29457 - Greg U 5 j
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract 29457 (Phase 1 and 2) and TTM 29457, Amendment #1
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
at the time the site -was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision will not cause serious public health problems
because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal
requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing overhead transmission
lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they were installed
pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and direction of
the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
RESOPCTT29457 - Greg .
0,51
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract 29457 (Phase 1 and 2) and TTM 29457, Amendment #1
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
Mitigated Negative Declaration on file with the Community Development
Department; and
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Amending Tract Map
29457 (Phase 1 and 2) and Tentative Tract Map 29457 (Amendment #1) 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 8th day of May, 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
RESOPCTT29457 - Greg
u5 5
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
AMENDING TRACT MAP 29457 (PHASES 1 AND 2)
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29457, AMENDMENT #1
T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1 . The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City
of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's
approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and holding harmless
the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment #4), GPA 2001-073,
EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City of La Quinta shall have the
right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. 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).
3. This Map is valid for a two year period, unless extended by the requirements of the
LQMC.
4. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall
obtain permits and/or clearances from the following Departments and 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.
A:\CondPC Tr29457#1 Rancho.wpd -Greg Page I Page I of I I
U 5 6
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater
discharge permit.
This project requires a project specific NPDES Permit. the The applicant shall submit
a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to
issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the
required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project
site.
5. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the Development
Impact Fee Program or other infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of
issuance of building permits.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
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. Dedications or grants required of this development include:
A. Public Streets
1) Jefferson Street - Applicant's half of 120-foot right of way.
B. Private Streets
1) Lots A, F, G, I, & K (Double -Loaded) - 37 feet.
2) Lots B, D, E, H, & J & S (Single -Loaded) - 33 feet.
3) Lot C (Entryway on Jefferson Street) - 91 feet or as otherwise approved by
the City Engineer
4) Cul de Sac Bulbs - 39 46-foot radius, minimum.
C. Flood easements to CVWD for all areas below the elevation of 50.00 feet which
are not drainage isolated (to elevation 50.00) from the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel.
A-\CondPC Tr29457#1 Ranchompd -Greg Page 2 Page 2 of 11
15 7
b'?
9. Right of way geometry for culs de sac, 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. 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 20-foot perimeter setbacks along Jefferson Street. The 20-
foot minimum depth may be used as an average depth for meandering wall designs.
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, mailbox clusters and common areas.
13. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to Avenue 48, Jefferson Street
except for the Jefferson Street entryway aligned with Avenue 49, and Avenue 50.
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. 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.
FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(S)
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.
A:\CondPC Tr29457#1 Rancho.wpd -Greg Page 3 Page 3 of 11
k158
2821
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
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.
IMPROVEMENT 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 reimburse others who construct improvements that are
obligations of this map, to secure the cost of the improvements for future
construction, or a combination of these methods.
In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the City
prior to approval of any final map pursuant to this tentative map, the Applicant shall,
A.',CondPC Tr29457#1 Rancho.wpd - Greg Page 4 Page 4 of 11 U 5 ,j
2jr)
at the time of approval of the final map, reimburse the City for the cost of those
improvements according to the conditions of approval for Specific Plan 84-004.
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 listed in
the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies
shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or
T.V. cable improvements. However, improvements for any improvement agreement
will 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., perimeter walls & landscaping, common lots and entry 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
A.ACondPC Tr29457#1 Rancho.wpd - Greg Page 5
Page 5 of 11
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. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a 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. The plan must be approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of a grading permit. 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.
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 n this condition are not an entitlement and more restrictive limits may
be imposed in the map approval or plan checking process. If compliance with this
requirement is impractical, however, the City will consider 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
other 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.
A:ACondPC T29457#1 Ranchompd - Greg Page
U65.
212
Page 6 of 11
32. Maximum pad elevation for following lots shall be:
Lot
259
47.9 feet
Lot
260
49.1 feet
Lot
261
50.2 feet
Lot
262
51.4 feet
Lot
263
52.5 feet
Lot
264
53.0 feet
Lot
265
53.8 feet
DRAINAGE
33. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for
Rancho La Quinta. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner.
34. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the
Whitewater Drainage Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs
of any sampling and testing of the development's effluent 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. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make
provisions in the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations.
35. The tract shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water from any well
sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for
development of this property.
36. Lots 259 through 265 shall have a common area retention basin in conformance with
Engineering Bulletin #97-03.
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 and all proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed
development shall be installed underground, except existing utility lines attached to
joint -use 92 Kv transmission power poles are exempt from this undergrounding
requirement.
A:\CondPC Tr29457#1 Ranchompd -Greg Page 7
�6?
2�3
Page 7 of 11
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 is responsible for the following street improvements which shall conform
with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction:
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
11 Jefferson Street (Major Arterial) - Reimburse the City for the outside 20 feet
of pavement, curb & gutter and install six-foot meandering sidewalk.
Secure and eanstFuet per the provisions of Specific Plan 84 004.-
2) Avenue 48 (Primary Arterial) - Reimburse City for half street improvements
per the provisions of Specific Plan 84-004.
3) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - 43-foot half of the 86-foot improvement
(curbface to curbface) plus 6-foot meandering sidewalk. For the length of
the applicant's frontage.
B. ON -SITE PRIVATE STREETS
1)
Lots A,
F, G,
I, & K (Double -Loaded) - 36 feet between curbfaces.
2)
Lots B,
D, E,
H,--& J & S (Single -Loaded) - 32 feet between curbfaces.
3) Lot C (Entryway on Jefferson Street) - Stacking room (minimum) for four in-
bound vehicles without blocking the public sidewalk (may be split into two
lanes of two each).
4) Culs de Sac - Per Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A
(offset), 38 45-foot curb radius.
41. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and
other devices; 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
u63
A:ACondPC Tr2945741 Rancho.wpd - Greg Page 8 Page 8 of I I
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. 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 curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be vertical
0/8" 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. Direct access from public streets is limited to Lot C which shall align with Avenue 49.
47. 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" 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"
48. 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.
49. 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.
LANDSCAPING
50. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks and common lots.
A:ACondPC Tr29457#1 Rancho.wpd -Greg Page 9
u6'1
2:J
Page 9 of 11
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 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 Transit
and approved by the City Engineer.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
54. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
55. 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.
56. 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.
57. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City Engineer and
the precise grading plans. 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
58. 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 they are accepted by the appropriate
public agency.
065
2y6
A:\COndPC'Ir29457N1 Rancho.wpd-Greg Page 10 Page 10 of 11
FEES AND DEPOSITS
59. 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
60. All applicable conditions of Specific Plan 84-004 shall be met.
�16
291
A \CondPC Tr29457# 1 Ranchompd -Greg Page 11 Page 11 of 11
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING TRACT MAPS 27952
AND 27952-1 TO ALLOW A CHANGE TO
CONDITION #16 OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
94-54 REQUIRING UNDER GROUNDING OF
OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINES FOR A SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION IN RANCHO LA
QUINTA
CASE NO.: AMENDING TRACT MAPS 27952 AND 27952-1
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8th day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 16 of City Council Resolution 94-54 to allow an exemption
to the under grounding of existing overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District
high voltage power lines (92 Kv) for a subdivision of 22 acres into 55 single family and
other common lots, located on the south side of Rancho La Quinta Drive and east of
Mission Drive West in Rancho La Quinta; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 19`h day of July, 1994, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving the
subdivision of 22 acres into 55 single family and other common lots, located on the
south side of Rancho La Quinta Drive and east of Washington Street, more particularly
described as:
Being a portion of Parcels 2, 3, and 5 of Parcel Map 20469; NE and NW
quarters of Sections 31 and 32, T5S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, Tract Maps 27952-1 and 27952 were recorded with the
County of Riverside Recorder's Office on November 28, 1995 and August 30, 1996,
respectively; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13.20.115 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
RESOPCTT27952 - Greg
2y' u67
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Maps 27952 and 27952-1
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that
the Community Development Department t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-
421) and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings:
A. The proposed Map Amendments are consistent with the City of La Quinta
General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is within a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions
of the General Plan Update allowing a density of two to four units per acre;
therefore, provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan
84-004 designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single
family dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 27952 is consistent with
the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum).
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure improvements in the project conform
to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as
designed. Private streets provide access to all lots and connect with adjacent
streets in other tracts. The density and design standards for the Tract comply
with the Land Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2) and the Specific
Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
RESOPCTT27952 - Greg
u6�
2J�
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Maps 27952 and 27952-1
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing
overhead transmission lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they
were installed pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and
direction of the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum);
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Addendum on file with the Community Development Department; and
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Amending Tract Maps
27952 and 27952-1 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to
the attached conditions.
RESOPCTT27952 - Greg
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Maps 27952 and 27952-1
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 8`h day of May, 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
RESOPCTT27952 - Greg
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RECOMMENDED
AMENDING TRACT MAP 27952, RANCHO LA QUINTA
T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1 . The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of
the City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment
#4), GPA 2001-073, EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City
of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole
discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Amending Tract Map No. 27852 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).
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of
any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain
permits and/or clearances from the following Departments or 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 (per letter dated August 19, 1998)
• Imperial Irrigation District
• 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.
Cond PC Tr. 27952 Greg Page 1 of 8
il'7 1.
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27952
May 8, 2001
Page 2
4. The approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable
provisions of SP 84-004 and applicable Development Agreement.
5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the
City's adopted Infrastructure Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of
building permits.
6. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as
determined by the Building and Safety Director.
7. Applicant shall insure that landscaping and utility plans are coordinated to
provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures.
8. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and
irrigation plans to the CVWD for review and approval with respect to the
District's Water Management Program.
TRACT AND BUILDING DESIGN
9. That prior to issuance of the first building permit for lots in this tract, a plot plan
showing the proposed units shall be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Department.
10. Any minor changes in lot mix, sizes, lines, or shapes, or street alignments, shall
be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to
any final map approvals for recordation.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
1 1 . Schedule A fire protection approved Super fire hydrants (6" X 4" X 2.5" X 2.5")
shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart
in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a
fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1,000 g.p.m. for a two-hour duration
at 20 psi.
12. Prior to issuance recordation of final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one
blue line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for
review/approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and
spacing, and the system shall meet fire flow requirements. Plans shall be
signed/approved by a registered Civil Engineer and the local water company
Cond PC Tr. 27952 Greg Pagc 2 of 8 U
30Oj
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27952
May 8, 2001
Page 3
with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system
is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Department'.
13. The required water system, including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on an individual lot.
14. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the
construction of the models only. Plans for a temporary water system must be
submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building
permits.
UTILITIES
15. All conditions and requirements of the CVWD shall be met as noted in their
letter dated April 28, 1994, on file at City Hall.
16. Am' existing anel pmpesed titilitmes adjoeent to or an the PFOPOSeel site shall be
Existing overhead lines and all proposed utilities within
or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground, unless
otherwise permitted by General Plan Amendment 2000-073.
17. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground
utilities shall be installed prior to the surface improvements. The applicant shall
provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the
City Engineer.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
18. If the applicant desires to phase tract improvements, tract phasing plans shall
be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and Community
Development Department prior to recordation of any final map under this
tentative map.
The applicant shall develop tract phases in the order of the approved phasing
plan. Improvements required of each phase shall be completed prior to issuance
of Certificates of Occupancy within the phase unless otherwise approved by the
City Engineer.
u73
Cond PC Tr. 27952 Greg Page 3 of 8
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27952
May 8, 2001
Page 4
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
19. The applicant shall construct, or enter into a secured agreement to construct,
the on- and off -site grading, streets, utilities, landscaping, on -site common area
improvements, and any other improvements required by these conditions and
shall meet all other obligations or secured said obligations before approval of
this tentative map or before any final map(s) under this tentative tract map.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing
structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
20. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot wide public utility easements contiguous
with and along both sides of all private streets.
21. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and
accesss to utility lines and structures, park lands, drainage basins, common
areas, and mailbox clusters.
22. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any
portion of the property included in this tentative map between the date of
approval by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s)
covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved
by the City Engineer.
GRADING
23. 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 of the 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.
24. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance.
25. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering
investigation shall be conducted. The report of the investigation ("the soils
report") shall be submitted with the grading plan.
26. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan shall
be submitted on 24" by 36" media and must meet the approval of the City
Engineer prior to approval of any final map(s)•
u74
Cond PC Tr. 27952 Greg Page 4 of 8
307
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27952
May 8, 2001
Page 5
The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report
and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering
geologist. A statement shall appear on 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.
Prior to issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall provide a separate
document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer,
geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The
document shall, for each building pad in the tract, state the pad elevation
approve on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the
difference, if any. The data shall be organized by the trat phase and lot number
and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
27. The tract shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity
to flow out of the tract through a designated overflow and into the historic
drainage relief route. Similarly, the tract shall be graded to receive storm flow
from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow.
2& Storm water runoff produced in 24 hours during a 100-year storm shall be
retained on -site. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is
responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets.
Storm water produced during a 100-year storm shall not overflow onto street
rights -of -way except through approved storm drainage conveyance locations.
29. In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be considered to be
zero unless applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise.
30. The design of the tract shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels
or frequencies in any area outside the tract.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
31. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement
program is in effect 60-days prior to recordation of any final map for this
development, the development shall be subject to the provisions of the
Ordinance.
If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement
program, the applicant shall design and construct street improvements as listed
below.
Cond PC Tr. 27952 Greg
3Uu u75
Page 5 of 8
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27952
May 8, 2001
Page 6
32. Improvement plans for all on -site and offsite street and access gates shall be
prepared by a registered civil engineer using 24" by 36" media. Improvements
shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted
Standard Drawings, and as approved by the City Engineer.
Improvement plans for all on -site and offsite street and access gates shall be
prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted Standard Drawings, and as
approved by the City Engineer.
Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans' design procedure for a
20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading.
Minimum structural sections are as follows:
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section for use during
development of the tract, the partial section shall be designed with a strength
equivalent to the 20-year design strength.
33. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs,
markings and other devices, raised medians where required, street name signs,
and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required.
34. The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the
installation of offsite and tract -wide improvements with development of two or
more final maps within the tentative map.
35. The following street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the
General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
A. North -South Street and Interior Residential Streets - 32-feet wide
between curbfaces, subject to approval by the City Engineer.
B. Rancho La Quinta Drive - 36-feet wide between curbfaces.
36. Culs-de-sac streets shall have a minimum outside curb radius of 45-feet and a
maximum center island curb radius of 5-feet unless otherwise approved by the
City Engineer and Fire Marshal.
:07
Cond PC Tr. 27952 Greg Page 6 of 8
u 7 6
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27952
May 8, 2001
Page 7
37. All streets proposed for residential or other access drives shall be designed and
constructed with curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to
convey nuisance water flows without ponding in year and drive areas.
LANDSCAPING
38, Landscape and irrigation plans for common lots, setbacks and medians shall be
signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape areas shall
have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City
Engineer. Common basins and park areas shall be designed with a turf grass
surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall meet the requirements of and be signed by
the Community Development Director, the City Engineer, the CVWD, and the
Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
39. The City is contemplating adoption of a quality -assurance program for privately -
funded construction. If the program is adopted prior to the issuance of permits
for construction of the improvements required of this map, the applicant shall
fully comply with the quality -assurance program.
If the quality -assurance program has not been adopted, the applicant shall
employ construction quality -assurance measures with meet the approval of the
City Engineer.
40. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers,
geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other licensed professionals, as
appropriate, to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish
and sign accurate record drawings.
41. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City
reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City
Engineer. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings", "As -Built" or
"As -Constructed" 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 PC Tr. 27952 Greg
3Ur� U77
Page 7 of 8
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27952
May 8, 2001
Page 8
MAINTENANCE
42. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of landscaping
and related improvements.
43. The applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the subdivision such as
common lots, landscape setbacks and retention basins until those areas have
been accept3ed for maintenance by the HOA. The applicant shall maintain all
other improvements until final acceptance of tract improvements by the City
Council (i.e., CC and R's).
44. The applicant shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet for
streets, landscaping and related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage
facilities, or any other improvements to be maintained by the HOA. The booklet
should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures
and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist
the HOA in planing for routine and long term maintenance.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
45. 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
46. On- and off -site grading, drainage, street, lighting, landscaping and irrigation,
park, gate and perimeter wall plans shall be submitted to the Engineering
Department for plan checking. The plans are not approved for construction until
they have been signed by the City Engineer.
47. Prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy for buildings within the tract, the
applicant shall traffic control devices and street name signs along access roads
to those buildings.
48. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit the proposed
street names (3/street) to the Community Development Department for
approval.
49. A plot plan application and plans shall be filed and approved by the Director of
Community Development for the two pool area improvements prior to issuance
of building permits for said improvements.
U78
3U rj
Page 8 of 8—
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA.
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING PARCEL MAP 20469 TO
ALLOW A CHANGE TO CONDITION #14 REQUIRING
UNDER GROUNDING OF OVERHEAD
TRANSMISSION LINES FOR 17 SINGLE FAMILY
AND GOLF COURSE LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY
693 ACRES IN RANCHO LA QUINTA
CASE NO.: AMENDING PARCEL MAP 20469
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8"' day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 14 to allow an exemption to the under grounding of existing
overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District high voltage power lines (92 Kv) for
a subdivision of 693 acres into 17 single family and other common lots, located on the
south side of Avenue 48, north side of Avenue 50, west side of Jefferson Street and
east of Washington Street in Rancho La Quinta; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director of the City of La
Quinta, California, did on the 181h day of December, 1985, hold a duly noticed Public
Hearing approving the subdivision of 693 acres into 17 residential and golf course lots,
located on the south side of Avenue 48, north side of Avenue 50, west side of
Jefferson Street and east of Washington Street, more particularly described as:
Being a portion of the NE 1 /4 of Sections 3 and portions of Section 32,
T5S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, Parcel Map 20469 was recorded with the County of Riverside
Recorder's Office on January 30, 1987; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13.20.1 15 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
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 t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-
RESOPC PM 20469-Greg T.
u79
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Parcel Map 20469 - Rancho La Quinta
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
421) and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings:
A. The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is within a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions
of the General Plan Update allowing a density of 2 to 4 units per acre; therefore,
provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan 84-004
designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single family
dwellings and golf related facilities. Parcel Map 20469 is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum).
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure improvements in the project conform
to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as
designed. The density and design standards for the Tract comply with the Land
Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2) and the Specific Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
RESOPC PM 20469-Greg T.
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Parcel Map 20469 - Rancho La Quinta
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing
overhead transmission lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they
were installed pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and
direction of the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Mitigated Negative Declaration on file with the Community Development
Department; and
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Amending Parcel Map
20469 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
RESOPC PM 20469-Greg T. 3p�
U 8 1.
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Parcel Map 20469 - Rancho La Quinta
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 81h day of May, 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
RESOPC PM 20469-Greg T. U 89
313
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RECOMMENDED
AMENDING PARCEL MAP 20469, RANCHO LA QUINTA
T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1. Amending Parcel Map No. 20469 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).
2. Amending Parcel Map No 20469 shall comply with the conditions and
requirements of Specific Plan 84-004 as in effect at the time of recordation.
3. The final map shall not be recorded until Specific Plan 84-004 and Change of
Zone Case No. 84-014 become effective.
SITE PLAN
5. The final map shall conform substantially with the approved tentative map as
contained in the Community Development Department's file for TPM 20469 and
the following conditions of approval, which conditions shall take precedence in
the event of any conflict wit the provision of the tentative map.
6. Prior to submittal of the final map for plan check, the Applicant shall submit a
master perimeter wall plan for the Community Development Department
demonstrating that the perimeter lots are of sufficient depth to accommodate
the perimeter wall setbacks as required by the conditions for SP 84-004.
7. Lot 17 (golf course) shall be divided into two lots in accordance with the
approved phasing plan for SP 84-004.
Streets Grading and Drainaoe
8. The Applicant shall dedicate half -width right-of-ways in accordance with their
general plan designation for Avenue 48, Avenue 50 Washington Street and
Cond PC PM 20469 Greg Pagc I of 6
t) �i
31
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Parcel Map 20469 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Jefferson Street. The construction and phasing of the public street
improvements shall be in accordance with the conditions of approval for SP 84-
004.
9. The Applicant shall develop all roads internal to the project in accordance with
the design standards specified in the Specific Plan and the structural standards
in effect at the time of map approval in conjunction with the phased
implementation of the Specific Plan. All roadways within the Specific Plan area
shall remain private.
10. The final map shall designate project entrances at the following locations:
a. Washington Street at Eisenhower Drive
b. Avenue 48 at Adams Street
C. Avenue 48 near Dune Palms Road
d. Jefferson Street approx. 1,220 feet south of Avenue 48
e. Avenue 50 at approximately the midway point of the project's frontage
along Avenue 50.
All other portions of the project's perimeter adjacent to public right-of-way shall
be designated as restricted or no access.
1 1 . Prior to submittal of the final map for plan check, the Applicant shall submit a
preliminary internal street plan to the Community Development Department and
Fire Marshal for review and approval. The plan shall designate alternate
emergency accesses for culs-de-sac having lengths exceeding 550 feet and shall
include a cross-section detailing construction of said emergency accesses.
12. Prior to approval of the final map, the Applicant shall submit a conceptual
master grading and drainage plan for the entire site in accordance with the
following requirements of the City Engineer and SP 84-04:
a. The plan shall comply with the standards of the Uniform Building Code
and other applicable Municipal Ordinances.
b. Effort shall be made to minimize unnecessary grading and to preserve and
utilize existing land forms to the largest extent possible.
C. Grading for the proposed golf course shall take into amount the bank
heights required to carry the design flow with the necessary freeboard.
Cond PC PM 20469 Greg `Pag f"�� 2
o
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Parcel Map 20469 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
d. The Applicant shall coordinate with developments to the north and
submit a master grade plan for Avenue 48.
e. The Applicant shall coordinate with proposed developments to the north
and submit a plan which considers the drainage from the north and west
is channeled to the La Quinta Stormwater Evacuation Channel.
f. All single family pad elevation shall be protected from a 100-year storm.
All drainage shall be contained on the site or channeled to the La Quinta
Stormwater Evacuation Channel.
Public Utilities and Services
13. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water
District.
a. Conceptual master plans for water and sewer facilities on the site shall
be submitted for review and approval.
b. The water system shall be installed in accord with the District
requirements. The District will need additional facilities, which may
include wells, reservoirs, and booster pumping stations, to provide for the
orderly expansion of its system. The Applicant will be required to provide
and dedicate to the District any land needed for these facilities.
C. The sanitary sewer system shall be installed in accord with District
regulations. The area shall be annexed to Improvement District No. 55
for sanitation service.
14. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Imperial Irrigation
District.
a. Provision shall be made underground utilities to the extent feasible.
be plac-e Underground.
b.
roadways with5tit prior iev,evv and approve4-� GitY. It is intended
that other available aternatives be evaluated pfior to said relocation.
Existing overhead lines and all proposed utilities within or adjacent to the
Cond PC PM 20469 Greg
U8J
Page 3 of �
k J
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Parcel Map 20469 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
proposed development shall be installed underground, unless otherwise
permitted by General Plan Amendment 2000-073.
C. The Applicant shall provide a site for an electrical substation in
accordance with one of the two following provisions:
(1) Dedicate to IID a 330 feet by 330 feet site along the south side of
Avenue 48, east of Adams Street in accordance with the District's
requirements.
(2) Prior to approval of the final map by the City Council, submit a
deed or other proof of conveyance of property located at an
approved alternate site to IID in accordance with the District's
requirements.
15. The Applicant shall comply with eh following requirements for utility easements:
a. Prior to submittal of the final map for plan check, the Applicant shall
coordinate with all utility companies (including gas, water, sewer and
electricity) to ensure that adequate provisions are made for on- and off -
site easements for the provision of the future facilities.
b. At the time of final map submittal, the Applicant shall provide the
Community Development Department with letter from he applicable
utilities stating that adequate provisions for future facilities are provided
and that there are no conflicts with other easements.
C. All easements shall be shown on the final map exhibit.
16. The Applicant shall pay a per -unit school development fee as determined by the
Desert Sands Unified School District in accordance with the school mitigation
agreements as approved by the La Quinta City Council and in effect at the time
of issuance building permits.
17. The Applicant shall delineate and dedicate a 10-acre park site on the final map
in accordance with City approval, unless other approved alternate recreational
facilities are approved by the City as allowed by SP 84-004.
Miscellaneous
18. The Applicant shall satisfactorily mitigate archaeological concerns identified in
previously conducted site surveys prior to initiation of grading. A qualified
J17
Cond PC PM 20469 Greg Page 4 of 6 U 8 U
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Parcel Map 20469 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
archaeologist shall certify as to the adequacy of mitigation measures prior to
issuance of any grading (or related) permits.
19. The buried remains are encountered during development, a qualified
archaeologist shall be contacted immediately and appropriate mitigation
measures shall be taken.
20. Prior to the issuance of grading permits or any disturbance of the land, the
Applicant shall provide for mitigation of the impact on the Coachella Valley
Fringe -Toed Lizard by complying with requirements of the mitigation agreement
as approved by the City Council and in effect at the time of recordation.
21. The Applicant shall demonstrate the adequate provision has been made for non -
automotive means of transportation within the project site as a means of
reducing dependence on private automobiles.
22. Specific project designs shall encourage the use of the public transit by
providing for bus shelters as required by the Community Development Director
and consistent with the requirements of local transit districts and the specific
plan.
23. Tentative maps shall be designed to ensure compliance with the State laws
regarding solar accessibility. To the extent possible, all structures shall be sited,
oriented and designed so as to minimize the energy needs for cooling.
24. Prior to the issuance of grading permits or the approval of final maps, the
Applicant shall submit a phasing schedule and map for the entire project, which
shall include the phasing of off -site infrastructure, to the Community
Development Director for review and approval in accordance with SP 84-004
and the following conditions:
a. No lot shall be divided by two or more phases.
25. Applicant understands that the City has incorporated in 1982 and has not yet
enacted a complete policy on exactions on new development to provide
municipal improvements and facilities needed as a result of the cumulative
impact of such new development; that the City is in the process of preparing
and enacting such a policy, which will include uniform fees to be imposed upon
new construction to fund the following public improvements and facilities: fire
station, public safety facility, city hall par and recreation facilities, schools,
drainage facilities, major thoroughfares, bridges, and traffic signalization; and,
the City expects to enact said fees policy on or before December 31, 1984.
Applicant agrees to pay said fee or fees in the amount and at the time enacted
A 7
Cond PC PM 20469 Greg Page 5 of 6
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Parcel Map 20469 - Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
and from time to time amended by the City. To the extent that Applicant
constructs specific facilities included within the fee structure, it shall receive
appropriate credit, as determined by the City Council. If said fee shall financing
of permanent or temporary school facilities, Condition No. 16 (school
development fee) shall be deleted.
26. The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of
the City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment
#4), GPA 2001-073, EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City
of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole
discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
U88
Cond PC PM 20469 Greg "' ` 0Page 6 of 6
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING TRACT MAP 27840
(AMENDMENT #1) TO ALLOW A CHANGE TO
CONDITION #14 OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
94-25 REQUIRING UNDER GROUNDING OF
OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINES FOR SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION IN RANCHO LA
QUINTA (SPECIFIC PLAN 84-004)
CASE NO.: AMENDING TRACT MAPS 27840
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 81h day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 14 of City Council Resolution 94-25 to allow an exemption
to the under grounding of existing overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District
high voltage power lines (92 Kv) for a subdivision of 55 acres into 130 single family
and other common lots, located on the southeast corner of Washington Street and 48'
Avenue in Rancho La Quinta connecting to Tracts 28343, 28640 and 27952; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 22nd day of February, 1994, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving the
subdivision of 55 acres into 130 single family and other common lots (i.e., TTM,
Amendment #1) under Resolution 94-25, located on the southeast corner of
Washington Street and 48`h Avenue, more particularly described as:
Being a portion of Parcels 1, 2, 5 and 8 of Parcel Map 20469; NE and
NW Quarters of Sections 31 and 32, T5S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, Tract Map 27840 was recorded with the County of Riverside
Recorder's Office on May 25, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13.20.115 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
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
RESOPCTT27840 Greg T -
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Final Tract Map 27840, Amendment #1
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
the Community Development Department t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-
421) and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings:
A. The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the
General Plan Update allowing a density of 2 to 4 units per acre; therefore,
provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan 84-004
designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single family
dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 27840 is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum).
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure improvements in the project conform
to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as
designed. Private streets provide access to all lots and to adjacent tracts. The
density and design standards for the Tract comply with the Land Use Element
of the General Plan (Chapter 2) and the Specific Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
RESOPCTT27840 Greg T -
UJO
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Final Tract Map 27840, Amendment #1
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing
overhead transmission lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they
were installed pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and
direction of the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004; and,
3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Amending Tract Map
27840 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
RESOPCTT27840 Greg T -
u9].
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Final Tract Map 27840, Amendment #1
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 81h day of May, 2001 by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIEVE BOBBINS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
RESOPCTT27840 Greg T -
9,
323 u`�
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RECOMMENDED
AMENDING TRACT MAP 27840, RANCHO LA QUINTA
T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1 . The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of
the City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment
#4), GPA 2001-073, EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City
of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole
discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Amending Tract Map No. 27840 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).
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of
any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain
permits and/or clearances from the following Departments or 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 (per letter dated August 19, 1998)
• Imperial Irrigation District
• 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.
COND PC TR 27840 Ong. - GREG
Page I of 15
u93
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 2
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 Notice of Intent
received from the CWQCB 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. The approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable
provisions of SP 84-004 and applicable Development Agreement.
5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the
City's adopted Infrastructure Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of
building permits.
6. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as
determined by the Building and Safety Director.
7. Applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the setback lots along 481h
Avenue and Washington Street. Design of these setbacks shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Commission. The applicant is encouraged to minimize
steep slope designs within the perimeter landscaping setback areas along 481h
Avenue. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn and spray irrigation
within 5-feet of street curb.
8. Landscaping and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, common retention basins
and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and
approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments,
CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner.
9. Applicant shall insure that landscaping and utility plans are coordinated to
provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures.
10. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and
irrigation plans to the CVWD for review and approval with respect to the
District's Water Management Program.
TRACT AND BUILDING DESIGN
1 1 . Development of the project site shall comply with amended map Exhibit "A" for
TTM 27840, and the following conditions.
COND PC TR 27840 Orig. - GREG 3 �1"ge 2 of 15 U `�
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 3
12. The development of custom, single family lots, if any shall be governed by the
following:
A. The applicant shall establish a Design Review Committee to review and
approve all custom home development within the Tract. The main
objectives of this Committee shall be to assure building architecture,
building materials and colors, building heights and setbacks, and
landscape design follow appropriate design themes throughout the tract.
Procedures and operation of the committee shall be set forth in the
Tract's CC and R's.
B. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for any house within TTM
27840, landscaping/groundcover shall be installed and appropriately
maintained.
C. All roof -mounted equipment shall be screened form view at all sides by
design of the house. All ground -mounted mechanical equipment shall be
screened from view by methods approved by the Community
Development Department.
D. No two-story units shall be allowed within 75-feet of 48`h Avenue per
Specific Plan 84-004.
E. Minimum dwelling unit sizes are 1,400 square feet (living area).
F. All dwelling units shall have a minimum two car garage measuring 20' by
in overall size.
G. Lot 60 of this map shall be increased to have a minimum frontage of 50
feet.
H. Prior to approval of any final map within this amended tentative map, golf
course Lots L through S of this map shall be merged with Parcel 5.
13. Any minor changes in lot mix, sizes, lines, or shapes, or street alignments, shall
be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to
any final map approvals for recordation.
COND PC TR 27840 Orig. - GREG 32 P" 3 of u 9
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 4
UTILITIES
.�..r�....« r
subject to this reqtimirernent per the spe ifie plan. Existing overhead lines and
all proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be
installed underground, unless otherwise permitted by General Plan Amendment
2000-073.
15. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground
utilities shall be installed prior to the surface improvements. The applicant shall
provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the
City Engineer.
MAINTENANCE
16. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit to the
Community Development Director the following documents which shall
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the open space/recreation areas
and private streets and drives shall be maintained in accordance with the intent
and purpose of this approval.
A. The document to convey title
B. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions to be recorded; and,
C. Management and maintenance agreement to be entered into with the
unit/lot owners of this land division.
The CC and R's shall be recorded at the same that the final map is recorded.
A Homeowners' Association with the unqualified right to access the owners of
the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs, shall be established and
continuously maintained. The association shall have the right to lien the
property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. Such
lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrance other than a first deed of
trust, provided that such deed of trust is made in good faith and for value and
is of record prior to the lien of the HOA.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
17. Applicant shall construct, or enter into a secured agreement to construct, the
on- and off -site grading, streets, utilities, landscaping, on -site common area
improvements, and any other improvements required by these conditions and
shall meet all other obligations or secured said obligations before approval of
U90
COND PC TR 27840 Orig. - GREG Page 4 of 15
'J 'i
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 5
this tentative map or before any final map(s) under this tentative tract map as
specified hereinafter.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing
structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
18. If tract improvements are phased with multiple final maps, off -site
improvements and tract -wide improvements (i.e., perimeter walls, common
areas and setback landscaping, and gates) required of any final map within this
map unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Tentative map
improvements shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final
map.
The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the
installation of offsite and tract -wide improvements with development of two or
more final maps within the tentative map.
19. The applicant shall reimburse the development to the north for the actual cost
to that development for construction of improvements to the south side of
Avenue 48 contiguous to this tentative tract. This reimbursement may be
deferred until Phase II of the Rancho La Quinta development provided the
applicant provides security in guarantee of the reimbursement.
ACQUISITIONS AND DEDICATIONS
20. Applicant shall dedicate or deed public street right-of-way and utility easements
for the full Rancho La Quinta development of which this map is a part. Said
easements shall conform with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code,
applicable specific plans and as required by the City Engineer.
Dedications or deeds required for approval of this tract include:
A. Avenue 48: 55-feet width right-of-way
B. Washington Street: 60-feet half width right-of-way from the specific plan
centerline of Washington Street as amended and provided by the City.
Additional right-of-way as necessary to provide a minimum of 12 feet of
right-of-way behind the curbing for the full length of Washington Street
frontage. The main entryway shall include corner cutbacks in addition to
the 12-foot setback.
C. North boundary of tentative tract - easement for acceptance of drainage
from existing facilities in sag point in Avenue 48.
323 u9`7
COND PC TR 27840 Ong. - GREG Page 5 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 6
Street right-of-way geometry for cul-de-sacs, knuckle turns and corner cutbacks
shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801 and #805
respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
Dedication or deeding of street rights -of -way and utility easements shall be
made within 60-days of written demand for such dedications by the City
Engineer concurrent with approval of any final map within this tentative map,
whichever event occurs first.
Prior to Final Map approval, the applicant shall make a good -faith effort to
acquire, at a fair price, the land parcel known as Riverside County APN 617-
310-023, a wedge of property lying between Washington Street and the
southwest corner of the Rancho La Quinta property. If successful in acquiring
the property, the applicant shall dedicate or deed right-of-way along the
Washington Street frontage of the property at the time of approval of the
tentative map.
If the applicant is not able to acquire the property at a fair price, the applicant
shall, prior to approval of the final map, submit a request to the City to acquire
the property via the power of eminent domain. The request shall be guaranteed
by security in the amount of 150% of the appraised cost of the property plus
estimated legal fees, administrative fees and court costs. If the property is
acquired in this manner, the applicant shall deed or dedicate Washington Street
right-of-way and common -area setback lots along this property within 60 days
of the acquisition of the property.
The applicant shall be responsible for one third of the cost of the acquisition
(including legal and administrative costs and court costs) of this property. The
City will grant a credit to the applicant in the amount of two thirds of the cost
of the acquisition. The credit will be made against the applicant's other
obligations with respect to this development. The means of granting of this
credit shall be determined at a later date.
21, Prior to approval I of the first final map under this tentative map, the applicant
shall dedicate or deed common area setback lots, of minimum width as noted,
for the full length of the Rancho La Quinta development adjacent to the
following street rights -of -way:
A. Avenue 48 and Washington Street: 20 feet
Minimum widths may be used as average widths for meandering wall designs.
Where sidewalks, bike paths, and/or equestrian trails are required, the applicant
shall dedicate or deed blanket easements over the setback lots for those
purposes.
09g
COND PC TR 27840 Orig. - GREG
PageY� bf 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 7
Setback lots not shown on the amended map shall be designated as such on the
final map(s).
22. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights along the following streets from
lots abutting the streets:
A. Avenue 48
B. Washington Street
Access along these streets shall be restricted to approved project entries and
emergency access locations.
23. The applicant shall dedicate or deed any easements necessary for placement of
and access to utility lines and structures, park lands, drainage basins, common
areas, and mailbox clusters.
24. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any
portion of the property included in this tentative map between the date of
approval by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s)
covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved
by the City Engineer.
25. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance (Chapter 9.150)
shall be met concerning all supplemental accessory facilities.
26. 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 of the 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.
27. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent
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.
28. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance.
29. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan must
meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to approval of any final map(s).
The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report
and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering
geologist. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are required of this COND PC TR 27840 Orig. - GREG 3 J bage 7 of Iv " (�
9
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 8
development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953
of the Health and Safety Code.
Prior to issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall provide a separate
document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer,
geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The
document shall, for each building pad in the tract, state the pad elevation
approve on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the
difference, if any. The data shall be organized by the trat phase and lot number
and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times.
30. The tract shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity
to flow out of the tract through a designated overflow and into the historic
drainage relief route. Similarly, the tract shall be graded to receive storm flow
from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow.
31. Storm water runoff produced in 24 hours during a 100-year storm shall be
retained on -site. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is
responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets.
32. In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be considered to be
zero unless applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise.
For common retention basins a trickling sand filter and leachfield of a design
approved by the City Engineer shall be installed to percolate nuisance water.
The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons/day per
1,000 feet of drainage area.
The retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. If retention is on individual
lots, the retention depth shall not exceed two feet. If retention is in one or
more common retention basins, the retention depth shall not exceed six feet.
33. The design of the tract shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels
or frequencies in any area outside the tract.
34. The applicant shall consider drainage from adjacent developments as required
in the specific plan and herein above.
35. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement
program is in effect 60-days prior to recordation of any final map for this
development, the development shall be subject to the provisions of the
Ordinance.
941 - J 00
vP gt8of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 9
If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement
program, the applicant shall design and construct street improvements as listed
below.
36. Improvement plans for all on -site and offsite street and access gates shall be
prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with the LOMC, adopted Standard Drawings, and as
approved by the City Engineer.
Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans' design procedure for a
20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading.
Minimum structural sections are as follows:
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section for use during
development of the tract, the partial section shall be designed with a strength
equivalent to the 20-year design strength.
37. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs,
markings and other devices, raised medians where required, street name signs,
and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required.
The City Engineer may require miscellaneous incidental improvements and
enhancements to existing improvements as necessary to integrate the new work
with existing improvements and provide a finished product conforming with City
standards and practices. This includes street width transitions extending
beyond the tract boundaries.
38. The following street and landscaping improvements shall be constructed to
conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1 . Washington Street (Major Arterial) - 48' half width with medians.
The half -width improvements shall extend from Avenue 48
southerly to a point west of the most westerly southwest corner
COND PC TR 27840 Orig. - GREG Page 9 of 15 Y J
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 10
of the Rancho La Quinta development.
2. Washington Street at Eisenhower Drive - modifications of traffic
signal for four -legged intersection. The Applicant shall pay all
consists of the modification and shall reimburse the City for its
$3,400 cost of the design of said modification. If the Applicant's
total cost for the design and modification of the signal exceeds by
any amount the $25,000 cap set forth in the Development
Agreement underlying this tract, that amount shall be credited
toward the Applicant's obligation to participate in the improvement
of Adams Street between Avenue 48 and Highway 1 1 1 .
3. Adams Street (Primary Arterial) - 80-foot full improvement widths.
The applicant shall participate in 9.6% of the cost to design and
construct Adams Street between Avenue 48 and Highway 1 1 1,
including the cost of signals at Highway 1 1 1 and Avenue 48. The
9.6% figure is based on a prorata share of traffic contributed by
the Rancho La Quinta project to Adams Street based on a
calculation made by City staff utilizing the traffic study prepared
for SP 84-004.
B. ON -SITE STREETS
1 . Main interior circulation road - 36-feet wide.
2. Residential streets adjacent to Lots 89-91 and Lots 62-71 -
26-feet wide.
3. All other interior streets - 32-feet wide.
39. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted as follows:
A. Avenue 48 at Adams Street - full -turn access to line up with Adams
Street;
B. Washington St. at Eisenhower Dr. - full -turn access to line up with
Eisenhower Drive.
LANDSCAPING
40. The applicant shall provide landscaping improvements in required setbacks,
common, and median lots along the following streets:
A. Avenue 48 and Washington Street
COND PC TR 27840 Ong. - GREG Page 10 of 15
33o
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 11
The applicant is encouraged to minimize steep slope designs within the
perimeter landscaping setback areas. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no
lawn or spray irrigation within 5-feet of street curb.
41. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall prepare a water
conservation plan which shall include consideration of:
A. Methods to minimize the consumption of water, including water saving
features incorporated into the design of the structures, the sue of
drought tolerant and low-water usage landscaping materials, and
programs to increase the effectiveness of landscape and golf course
irrigation, as recommended by CVWD and the State Department of Water
Resources.
B. Methods for maximizing groundwater recharge, including the construction
of groundwater recharge facilities.
C. Methods for minimizing the amount of water used for on -site irrigation,
including the use of reclaimed water from sewage treatment facilities.
The water energy plan shall be subject to review and acceptance by
CVWD prior to final approval by the City Engineer.
42. Landscape and irrigation plans for common lots, setbacks and medians shall be
signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape areas shall
have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City
Engineer. Common basins and park areas shall be designed with a turf grass
surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall meet the requirements of and be signed by
the Community Development. Director, the City Engineer, the CVWD, and the
Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner.
43. The applicant shall insure that landscaping and utility plans are coordinated to
provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
44. The City is contemplating adoption of a quality -assurance program for privately -
funded construction. If the program is adopted prior to the issuance of permits
for construction of the improvements required of this map, the applicant shall
fully comply with the quality -assurance program.
COND PC TR 27540 Orig. - GREG Page I I of 15 1 U `j
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001 -
Page 12
If the quality -assurance program has not been adopted, the applicant shall
employ construction quality -assurance measures with meet the approval of the
City Engineer.
45. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers,
geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other licensed professionals, as
appropriate, to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish
and sign accurate record drawings.
46. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City
reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City
Engineer. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings", "As -Built" or
"As -Constructed" 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
47. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of landscaping
and related improvements.
48. The applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the subdivision such as
common lots, landscaped setbacks and retention basins until those areas have
been accepted for maintenance by the HOA. The applicant shall maintain all
other improvements until final acceptance of tract improvements by the City
Council.
49. The applicant shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet for
streets, landscaping and related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage
facilities, or any other improvements to be maintained by an HOA. The booklet
should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures
and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist
the HOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
50. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the
Community Development Department with written clearance from the DSUFD
that the per -unit impact fees have been paid.
COND PC TR 27840 Orig. - GREG Page 12 of IS
104
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 13
51. 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 DEPARTMENT
52. Schedule A fire protection approved Super fire hydrants (6" X 4" X 2.5" X 2.5")
shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart
in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a
fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1,000 g.p.m. for a two-hour duration
at 20 psi.
53. Prior to issuance recordation of final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one
blue line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for
review/approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and
spacing, and the system shall meet fire flow requirements. Plans shall be
signed/approved by a registered Civil Engineer and the local water company
with the following certification: I certify that the design of the water system
is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Department".
54. The required water system, including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on an individual lot.
55. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the
construction of the models only. Plans for a temporary water system must be
submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building
permits.
56. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a
Fire Department override system consisting of Knox Key operated switches,
Series KS-2P with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox
Company. Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted
to the Fire Department for review/approval prior to installation.
57. If public use type buildings are to be constructed, additional fire protection may
be required. Fire flows and hydrant location will be stipulated when building
plans are reviewed by the Fire Department.
COND PC TR 27840 Orig. - GREG Page 13 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 14
MISCELLANEOUS
58, On- and off -site grading, drainage, street, lighting, landscaping and irrigation,
park, gate and perimeter wall plans shall be submitted to the Engineering
Department for plan checking. The plans are not approved for construction until
they have been signed by the City Engineer.
59. Prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy for buildings within the tract, the
applicant shall traffic control devices and street name signs along access roads
to those buildings.
60. Appropriate approvals shall be secured prior to establishing any construction or
sales facilities, and/or signs on the subject property.
61. Restroom facilities for the grounds keepers shall be provided in the vicinity of
golf course, and a permanent golf course and homeowners maintenance facility
shall be constructed on the property to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director.
62. All outdoor lighting shall comply with Section 9.60.160 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
63. Applicant/Developer shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to
implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The applicant/developer is
required to work with Waste Management in setting up the following programs
for this project:
A. Developer shall prepare a plan to provide enlarged trash enclosures for
inclusion of separate facilities for storage of recyclables such as glass,
plastics, newsprint and steel and aluminum cans.
B. Developer shall provide proper on -site storage facilities within the project
for green waste associated with golf course and common area
maintenance. Compost materials shall be stored for pick-up by Waste
Management, or an authorized hauler for transplant to an appropriate
facility.
C. Curbside recycling service shall be provided in areas where no centralized
trash/recycling bins are provided or utilized.
COND PC TR 27840 Orig. - GREG Page 14 of 15
337
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27840
May 8, 2001
Page 15
64. The specific plan requires 10 acres of land to be dedicated for park purposes.
7.8 acres has been dedicated to date. The balance of 2.2 acres shall be paid
as a in -lieu fee prior to recordation of the final map.
65. Per the Specific Plan Conditions of Approval, a contribution of $100,000.00 as
a fire mitigation measure, shall be paid prior to issuance of the first building
permit for production of any custom homes.
66. Tract phasing plans, including tract phases in the order of the approved phasing
plan. Improvements required of each final map shall be completed and accepted
by the City Council prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy within the
map unless otherwise provided in the phasing plan.
67, Along 36-foot wide streets, stripped and labeled golf cart lanes shall be
provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Director of Community
Development.
68. A complete pedestrian and bicycle path system shall be provided within the
project. The design shall be subject to the approval of the Community
Development Director.
69. All conditions and requirements of the CVWD shall be met as noted in their
letter dated August 10, 1993, on file at City Hall.
COND PC TR 27840 Ong. - GREG
Page 15 of 15
!0 7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING TRACT MAP 28343 TO
ALLOW A CHANGE TO CONDITION #25 REQUIRING
UNDER GROUNDING OF OVERHEAD
TRANSMISSION LINES FOR A SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION IN RANCHO LA QUINTA
(SPECIFIC PLAN 84-004)
CASE NO.: AMENDING TRACT MAP 28343
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8th day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 25 of City Council Resolution 96-40 to allow an exemption
to the under grounding of existing overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District
high voltage power lines (92 Kv) for a subdivision of 23.5 acres into 74 single family
and other common lots, located on the east side of Washington Street and north of
Parc La Quinta in Rancho La Quinta connecting to Tracts 25154, 28640 and 27952;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 4" day of June, 1996, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving the subdivision
of 23.5 acres into 74 single family and other common lots, located on the west side
of Washington Street and north of Parc La Quinta, more particularly described as:
Being a portion of Parcels 3, 4 and 5 of Parcel Map 20469; NE and NW
Quarters of Sections 31 and 32, T5S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, Tract Map 28343 was recorded with the County of Riverside
Recorder's Office on October 25, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13,20.115 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
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 t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-
RESOPCTT28343 Greg T. -
33g 108
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 28343
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
421) and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings:
A. The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is within a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions
of the General Plan Update allowing a density of two to four units per acre;
therefore, provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan
84-004 designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single
family dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 28343 is consistent with
the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum).
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure improvements in the project conform
to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as
designed. Private streets provide access to all lots and connect with other
adjacent tracts. The density and design standards for the Tract comply with the
Land Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2) and the Specific Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
RESOPCTT28343 Greg T. -
'
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 28343
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing
overhead transmission lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they
were installed pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and
direction of the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Mitigated Negative Declaration on file with the Community Development
Department; and
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Final Tract Map 28343
(Amendment #1) for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the
attached conditions.
RESOPCTT28343 Greg T. -
�10
•�3�1
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 28343
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 8`h day of May, 2001 by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
STEVE BOBBINS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
RESOPCTT28343 Greg T. -
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
AMENDING TRACT MAP 28343 - RANCHO LA QUINTA
T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1.Upon their approve' by the Gity Geume", the Gity Glerk *9 authori2ed to file the"
Ganditions oi Approval with the Riverside Gounty Recorder for recordation against
propert es to vvh'eh they apply. The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify,
defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or
litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project including but not limited to
indemnifying and holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004
(Amendment #4), GPA 2001-073, EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The
City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Amending Tentative Map 28343 shall comply with the requirements and standards of
§ § 66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act)
and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified
by the following conditions.
3. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the
conditions of approval and secure those phases separately, a phasing plan shall be
submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City
Engineer.
The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth
in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase
shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of
permanent buildings within the phase unless the City Engineer approves a construction
sequencing plan for that phase.
4. Before the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of any
building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or
clearances from the following Departments and public agencies:
- Fire Marshal
- Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
- Community Development Department
- Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
- Desert Sands Unified School District
- Coachella Valley Water District
- Imperial Irrigation District
- California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit)
cond Tr. 28343 RanchoOrig. - 48 Greg 3 ('3'
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from
those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the
applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the
plans.
For projects requiring NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy
of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan
checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall
submit a copy of an approved Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan.
5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's
adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
6. All easements, rights of way and other property rights required of the tentative map
or otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and
functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the
process of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of
a final map or filing of a certificate of compliance for waiver of a final map. The
conferral shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for
access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of all essential
improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels.
7. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or
access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others,
the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to
those properties.
8. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot public utility easements contiguous with and along
both sides of all private streets.
9. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to
utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common
areas.
10. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of
this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of
recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such
easements are approved by the City Engineer.
1 1 . The proposed CVWD well site shall be reconfigured to provide a minimum 12 feet of
landscaped setback from the curbline of the adjacent road.
FINAL MAP(S)
12. As part of the filing package for final map approval, the applicant shall furnish the City,
on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer, accurate
computer files of the map(s) as approved by the City's map checker.
cond Tr. 28343 RanchoOrig. - 48 Greg
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
13. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24"
x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets &
Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have
signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature
blocks for the Planning Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for
construction until they are signed.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths,
gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the
street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). CVWD shall sign the combined plans before
their submittal for the City Engineer's signature.
"Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting,
and perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
14. 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.
When final plans are approved by the City, and prior to approval of the final map, the
applicant shall furnish accurate computer files of the complete, approved plans on
storage media and in a program format acceptable the City Engineer. At the
completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the
applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions including approved
revisions to the plans.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
15. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or enter into a
secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by
the City prior to agendization of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate
of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided,
and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures
or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
16. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of
improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted
by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates
shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside
agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone,
gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized
cond Tr. 28343 RanchoOrig. - 48 Greg - 7 t5 1 1 4
for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority
that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the
development.
17. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals
(plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements and development -wide
improvements lie: retention basins, perimeter walls & landscaping, gates, etc.) shall
be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer.
GRADING
18. Graded and/or undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand
nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other
wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development
and Public Works Departments.
19. Before occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall
submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with
Chapter 6.16, LQMC. In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish
security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee
compliance with the provisions of the permit.
20. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance.
21. The applicant shall conduct a thorough preliminary geological and soils engineering
investigation and shall submit the report of the investigation ("the soils report") with
the grading plan.
22. A registered civil engineer shall prepare a grading plan and must meet the approval of
the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading plan shall conform
with the recommendations of the soil's report and shall be certified as adequate by a
soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final
map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared
pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code.
23. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet
except for lots within this development, but not sharing a common street frontage,
where the differential shall not exceed five feet.
If the applicant is unable to comply with the pad elevation differential requirement, the
City will consider and may approve alternatives that preserve community acceptance
and buyer satisfaction with the proposed development.
24. Before issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document
bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor, that
lists actual building pad elevations for the building lots. The document shall list the
pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference
between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed
cumulatively if submitted at different times.
cond Tr. 28343 RanchoOrig. - 48 Greg •� `�
34r
UTILITIES
25. A!! existing and proposed titi"ties within of adjacent to the proposed development 9
be installed underground. 1 10gh voltage power lines-whieh the power autherity will not
Existing overhead lines and
all proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed
underground, unless otherwise permitted by General Plan Amendment 2000-073.
26. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall
be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall provide
certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
27, The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If
the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map or issuance of
a certificate of compliance for any waived final map, the development or portions
thereof may be subject to the provisions of the ordinance.
If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the
applicant shall be responsible for all street/traffic improvements required herein.
28. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the
General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
A. PRIVATE STREETS/CUL DE SACS
11 Residential - 32-foot-wide travel surface.
2) Collector (?300 homes or 3,000 vpd) - 40-foot-wide travel surface.
Main entry streets and interior circulation routes, bus turnouts,
acceleration/deceleration lanes, and/or other features contained in the approved
construction plans may warrant additional street widths, raised medians or other
mitigation measures as determined by the City Engineer.
29. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization
markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox
clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer.
Mid -block street lighting is not required.
30. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development
boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width
transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly constructed
improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the
City's standards and practices.
31. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared
by registered professional engineer(s) authorized to practice in the State of California.
Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
cond Tr. 28343 RanchoOrig. - 48 Greg ", ` 347 1 1 r)
adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by
the City Engineer.
32. Street right of way geometry for cul-de-sacs, knuckle turns and corner cutbacks shall
conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805
respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
33. All streets proposed to serve residential or other access driveways shall be designed
and constructed with curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to
convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas and to facilitate street
sweeping.
34. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for a 20-year life and
shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building
construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows:
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
The applicant shall submit mix designs for road base and pavement materials, including
complete testing lab results, for review and approval by the City. Paving operations
shall not be scheduled until mix design(s) is approved.
35. Before occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the development, the
applicant shall install all street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices and
street name signs along access routes to those buildings.
LANDSCAPING
36. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas, medians,
common retention basins, and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect and approved prior to building permit issuance.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development
Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the
Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans are
not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the City
Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural
Commissioner.
37. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas
outside the right of way.
38. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or
spray irrigation within 5-feet of curbs along public streets.
cond Tr. 28343 RanchoOrig. - 48 Greg `t `y
39. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to
provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
40. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
41. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical
engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide,
sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign
accurate record drawings.
42. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of
the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed"
clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor
certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the plan
computer files previously submitted to the City to reflect the as -constructed condition.
MAINTENANCE
43. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage,
landscaping and on -site street improvements. The applicant shall maintain off -site
public improvements until final acceptance of improvements by the City Council.
44. The applicant shall provide an executive summary maintenance booklet for streets,
landscaping and related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, or any other
improvements to be maintained by an HOA. The booklet should include drawings of
the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing
algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the HOA in planning for routine and
long term maintenance.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
45. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and
construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the
applicant makes application for plan checking and permits.
46. Prior to approval of a final map or completion of any approval process for modification
of boundaries of the property subject to these conditions, the applicant shall process
a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against the property and pay the cost
of the reapportionment.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
47, Schedule A fire protection approved Super fire hydrants (6" X 4" X 2-1 /2" X 2-1 /2")
shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 500-feet apart in any
direction with no portion of any frontage more than 250-feet from a fire hydrant.
Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 g.p.m. for two hour duration at 20 psi.
cond Tr. 28343 RanchoOrig. - 48 Greg
118
349
48. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy
of the water system plan to the Fire Department for review and approval. Plans shall
conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the
fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer
and the local water company with the following certification: " I certify that the design
of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside
County Fire Department."
49. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by
the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed
on an individual lot.
A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of
a model unit only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire
Department for review prior to issuance of building permits.
SPECIAL
50. Single story homes shall be built within 75-feet of the south boundary of the tentative
map
t sham be a rninwrnuni distance of SO feet frarn the
51. The production houses planned for these lots, if not previously approved by the City,
shall be approved by the Planning Commission before issuance of any building permits
for construction by the Building and Safety Department (i.e., Non -Hearing Business
Agenda).
52. All Zoning Code provisions shall be met prior to building permit issuance.
53. All homes shall be required to install front yard landscaping prior to final occupancy.
Each lot shall have two 15 gallon shade trees (corner lots shall have five), ten 5-gallon
shrubs and other landscaping (e.g., turf, turf and gravel, etc.), acceptable to the
Community Development Department pursuant to Chapter 8.13 of the LQMC. The
applicant/developer is encouraged to use drought resistant or native plant material for
the project. The applicant will be permitted to post securities to insure that the front
yard landscaping is installed for each home if the landscaping is not installed at time
of final release of occupancy. All landscaping materials shall be installed with 60-days
after occupancy clearances have been given.
54. Prior to issuance of the final map, Lot 77 shall be reserved for open space or single
family lots. Lot 77 shall not be used as a well site by the developer or the Coachella
Valley Water District.
55. Prior to issuance of a building permit, all common recreational amenities (i.e., pool/spa
and recreation building) planned for Lot 76 (or Lot 77) shall be approved by the
Planning Commission. Separate restroom facilities shall be provided for the on -site
maintenance workers of the country club on Lot 76 (or adjacent to this area) as
approved by the Commission.
9
cond Tr. 28343 RanchoOrig. - 48 Greg ' . J t q
56, All applicable Conditions of Approval of Specific Plan 84-004 (The Grove), Final
Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum) or Parcel Map 20469 shall be met
unless otherwise modified herein.
57. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the City Attorney shall approve the
annexation of this Tract (i.e., C.C. and R's documents) into the Rancho La Quinta
Homeowner's Association.
58. Prior to final map approval, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development
Department for review and approval a site plan showing the pedestrian and bicycle
path system for this Tract.
59. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant/developer shall work with the local
waste hauler to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462 by establishing on -site
trash and recycling services as follows:
A. Prepare a plan to provide enlarged trash enclosures for inclusion of separate
facilities for the storage of recyclables such as glass, plastics, newsprint and
steel or aluminum cans.
B. Provide proper on -site facilities with the project for green waste associated with
golf course or common maintenance. Compost materials shall be stored for
pickup by a waste hauler for transport to an appropriate recycling facility.
C. Curbside recycling services shall be provided in areas where no centralized
trash/recycling bins are provided or utilized.
The local trash hauler shall insure that any materials taken off -site for disposal are
recorded and the tonnage figures credited to the City of La Quinta to assist our State
obligations. The developer can contact the City's Recycling Coordinator for additional
information.
cond Tr. 29343 RanchoOrig. - 48 Greg
120
351
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING TRACT MAP 28640 TO
ALLOW A CHANGE TO CONDITION #34 OF CITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION 98-10 REQUIRING UNDER
GROUNDING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINES
FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
IN RANCHO LA QUINTA
CASE NO.: AMENDING TRACT MAP 28640
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 81h day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 34 of City Council Resolution 98-10 to allow an exemption
to the under grounding of existing overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District
high voltage power lines (92 Kv) for a subdivision of 23 acres into 70 single family and
other common lots, located on the east side of Tracts 25154 and 28343 in Rancho
La Quinta; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 3" day of February, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving the
subdivision of 23 acres into 70 single family and other common lots, located to the
east of Tract 25154, more particularly described as:
Being a portion of Parcels 4 and 5 of Parcel Map 20469
WHEREAS, Tract Map 28640 was recorded with the County of Riverside
Recorder's Office on September 17, 1998; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13.20.1 15 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment for this Amendment has
complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the
La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared
an Initial Study (EA 2001-421) and has determined that the proposed project(s) could
not have a significant adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed
RESOPCTT28640 -Greg JL
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 28640
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
mitigation measures and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact
should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings:
A. The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the
General Plan Update allowing a density of two to four units per acre; therefore,
provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan 84-004
designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single family
dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 28640 is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum).
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure improvements in the project conform
to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as
designed. Private streets provide access to all lots and to adjacent tracts. The
density and design standards for the Tract comply with the Land Use Element
of the General Plan (Chapter 2) and the Specific Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
RESOPCTT28640 -Greg
3�3Y�2
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 28640
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing
overhead transmission lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they
were installed pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and
direction of the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Mitigated Negative Declaration on file with the Community Development
Department; and
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Amending Tract Map
28640 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
RESOPCTT28640 -Greg
3 ;i 123
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 28640
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 81h day of May, 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 Quinta, California
RESOPCTT28640 -Greg
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RECOMMENDED
AMENDING TRACT MAP 28640, RANCHO LA QUINTA
T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 81 2001
GENERAL
1.
properties to whieh-t4l��
2. Amending Tract Map No. 28640 shall comply with the requirements and standards of
§ § 66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act)
and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified
by the following conditions.
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of any
building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or
clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District
• Imperial Irrigation District
• California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from
those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans,
applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the
plans.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater
discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits,
the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with
grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site
construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed Storm Water
Pollution Protection Plan for review by the Public Works Department.
4. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's
adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
125
. ♦7� �J
A:Wond PC Tr 28640.wpd Printed May 2, 2001 Page 1 of 8
PROPERTY RIGHTS
5. All easements, rights of way and other property rights required of the tentative map
or otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and
functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the
process of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of
a final map or parcel map or a waiver of parcel map. The conferral shall include
irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for access to and
maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of all essential improvements which are
located on privately -held lots or parcels.
6. Prior to approval of a final map, parcel map or grading plan and prior to issuance of a
grading permit, the applicant shall furnish proof of temporary or permanent easements
or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which
grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to
occur.
7. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or
access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others,
the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to
those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners.
8. The applicant shall dedicate public and private street right of way and utility easements
in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans,
and as required by the City Engineer.
9. Dedications required of this development consist of Lots A, B, C, & D (Private Streets)
- 33-foot right of way. Dedications shall include additional width as necessary for
features contained in the approved construction plans.
10. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot public utility easements contiguous with and along
both sides of all private streets.
1 1 . The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to
utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common
areas.
12. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of
this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of
recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such
easements are approved by the City Engineer.
FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(S)
13. As part of the filing package for final map approval, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage
�r
A:\Cond PC Tr 28640.wpd 3 5;11ted 512/01, Page 2 of 11
media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize
standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad
program.
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
14. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24"
x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets &
Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have
signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature
blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not
approved for construction until they are signed.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths,
gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the
street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by
CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature.
"Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting,
and subdivision perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
15. 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.
16. When final plans are approved by the City, and prior to approval of the final map, the
applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on
storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad
menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the
completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the
applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions including approved
revisions to the plans.
If the 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.
A:\Cond PC Tr 28640.wpd Printed 5/2/01, Page 3 of 11
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
17. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an
executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations
required by the City prior to agendization of a final map or parcel map or issuance of
a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security
provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures
or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
18. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of
improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted
by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates
shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside
agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone,
gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized
for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority
that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the
development.
19. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals
(plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements and development -wide
improvements (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 unless a construction phasing plan is approved by the City
Engineer.
20. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for
applicant's required share of improvements which have been or will be constructed by
others (participatory improvements).
Participatory improvements for this development include:
A. Prior to agendization of any final map under this tentative map, the applicant shall
enter into an unsecured agreement to reimburse the City for the applicant's share
of the costs incurred in improvement of Avenue 48 from Dune Palms Road to
Jefferson Street including signals and other required appurtenances. The
agreement shall require reimbursement according to the original phasing plan for
the overall Rancho La Quinta development as may be modified over time with the
City's approval.
359 128
A:\fond PC Tr 28640.wpd Printed 5/2/01, Page 4 of 11
The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the participatory improvements may,
at the City's option, be satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement
program if this development becomes subject to such a program.
GRADING
21. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand
nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other
wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development
and Public Works Departments.
22. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall
submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with
Chapter 6.16, LQMC. In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish
security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee
compliance with the provisions of the permit.
23. The applicant shall comply with the City's flood protection ordinance.
24. The applicant shall furnish a thorough preliminary geological and soils engineering
report (the "soils report") with the grading plan.
25. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the
approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading plan
shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as
adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on
the final map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been
prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code.
26. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at the interface of this
development with abutting properties and of 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, but not sharing common street frontage,
where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If compliance with this requirement
is impractical, the City will consider and may approve alternatives which minimize
safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with
the grade differential.
27. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document,
bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer or surveyor, that
lists actual building pad elevations for the building lots. The document shall list the
pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference
between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed
cumulatively if submitted at different times.
A:\Cond PC Tr 28640.wpd � 3 6RInted 5/2/01, Page 5 of 11
DRAINAGE
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the
following:
28. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels
or frequencies in any area outside the development.
29. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the
design storm) shall be retained within the Rancho La Quinta development unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to
the centerline of adjacent public streets.
30. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated
overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route.
31. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
32. Nuisance water shall be retained on site unless otherwise approved by the Rancho La
Quinta Homeowners' Association. A trickling sand filter and leachfield of a design
approved by the City Engineer shall be installed to percolate nuisance water. The sand
filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square
feet of drainage area.
33. If the applicant proposes drainage of stormwater from a design storm directly or
indirectly to public waterways, the applicant and, subsequently, the Homeowners'
Association if so arranged by the applicant, shall be responsible for any sampling and
testing of the development's effluent which may required under the City's NPDES
Permit or other city- or area -wide pollution prevention program and for any other
obligations and/or expenses which may arise from the such discharge of the
development's stormwater or nuisance water. The tract CC & Rs shall reflect the
existence of this potential obligation.
UTILITIES
34. All existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall
be installed underground. ' logh voltage powe - H mies which the power atitherity Will not
Existing overhead lines and all
proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed
underground, unless otherwise permitted by General Plan Amendment 2000-073.
35. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities
shall be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall
provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City
Engineer.
Yam,
A:\Cond PC Tr 28640.wpd .'�% 3 (rued 5/2/01, Page 6 of 11
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
36. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If
the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map or issuance of
a certificate of compliance for any waived final map, the development or portions
thereof may be subject to the provisions of the ordinance.
If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the
applicant shall be responsible for all street and traffic improvements required herein.
37. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the
General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
A. PRIVATE STREETS AND CULS DE SAC
11 Residential - 32 feet wide, curbface to curbface
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.
38. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization
markings and devices, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and
mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City
Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required.
39. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond development
boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width
transitions, or other incidental work which will ensure that newly constructed
improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the
City's standards and practices.
40. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared
by registered professional engineer(s) authorized to practice in the State of California.
Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by
the City Engineer.
41. Street right of way geometry for culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall
conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805
respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
`h 131
A:\Cond PC Tr 28640.wpd J .. 3 6 �rinted 5/2/01, Page 7 of 11
42. All streets proposed to serve residential or other access driveways shall be designed
and constructed with vertical curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods
to convey nuisance water without ponding and to facilitate street sweeping.
43. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for a 20-year life and
shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building
construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows:
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
The listed structural sections are minimums, not defaults. Street pavement sections
shall be designed using Caltrans design procedures with site -specific data for soil
strength and traffic volumes.
The applicant shall submit current (no more than two years old) mix designs for base
materials, Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, including complete mix
design lab results, for review and approval by the City. For mix designs over six
months old, the submittal shall include recent (no more than six months old at the time
proposed for construction) aggregate gradation test results to confirm that the mix
design gradations can be reproduced in production of the base or paving material.
Construction operations shall not be scheduled until mix designs are approved.
44. Final inspection and occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the
development will not be approved until the homes or permanent buildings have
improved access, including street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices
and street name signs, to publicly -maintained streets. If on -site streets are initially
constructed with only a portion of the full thickness of pavement, the applicant shall
complete the pavement when directed by the City but in any case prior to final
inspections of any of the final ten percent of homes within the tract.
LANDSCAPING
45. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas, medians,
common retention basins, and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
architect.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development
Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the
Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans are
not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the City
Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural
Commissioner.
132
AACond PC Tr 28640.wpd .. ) .Frinted 5/2/01, Page 8 of 11
J6
46. 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.
47. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or
spray irrigation within 5-feet of curbs along public streets.
48. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to
provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
49. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
50. The subdivider shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing
not included in the City's permit inspection program but which are required by the City
to provide evidence that materials and their placement comply with plans and
specifications.
51. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical
engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide,
sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign
accurate record drawings.
52. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of
the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed"
clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor
certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the plan
computer files previously submitted to the City to reflect the as -constructed condition.
MAINTENANCE
53. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous and perpetual maintenance of all
required improvements unless and until expressly released from said responsibility by
the City.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
54. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and
construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the
applicant makes application for plan checking and permits.
133
A:\Cond PC Tr 28640.wpd "" ` 3 `Printed 5/2101, Page 9 of 11
FIRE DEPARTMENT
55. Schedule A fire protection approved Super fire hydrants (6" X 4" X 2.5" X 2.5") shall
be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any
direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant.
Minimum fire flow shall be 1,000 g.p.m. for a two-hour duration at 20 psi.
56. Prior to issuance recordation of final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one blue
line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review/approval. Plans
shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall
meet fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered Civil
Engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that
the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by
the Riverside County Fire Department".
57. The required water system, including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by
the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed
on an individual lot.
58. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of
the models only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire
Department for review prior to issuance of building permits.
59. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a Fire
Department override system consisting of Knox Key operated switches, Series KS-2P
with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company.
Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted to the Fire
Department for review/approval prior to installation.
MISCELLANEOUS
60. Swimming pool and related recration area facilities on Lot 63 shall be installed before
issuance of the 30th building permit for this Tract, with plans for facilities approved
prior to issance of first building permit.
61. Restroom facilities shall be provided at the common pool and spa complex (Lot 63)•
Separate restroom facilities shall be accessible to the golf course maintenance workers
and gardeners during their normal working houres as approved by the Community
Development Director.
62. Final map(s) shall not be approve or recorded with lot widths of less than 60 feet until
a Specific Plan Amendment is approved permitting such lot widths.
63. The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City
of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's
approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and holding harmless
134
AACond PC Tr 28640.wpd �Pduted 5/2/011 Page 10 of 11
d
the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment #4), GPA 2001-073,
EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City of La Quinta shall have the
right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
A 5
A:\Cond PC Tr 28640.wpd �P&l@d 5001, Page 11 of 11
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING TRACT MAP 28912 TO
ALLOW A CHANGE TO CONDITION #33 OF CITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION 98-132 REQUIRING UNDER
GROUNDING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINES
FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
IN RANCHO LA QUINTA
CASE NO.: AMENDING TRACT MAPS 28912
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 81h day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 33 of City Council Resolution 98-132 to allow an exemption
to the under grounding of existing overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District
high voltage power lines (92 Kv) for a subdivision of 29 acres into 81 single family and
other common lots, located on the north side of Avenue 50 and west of Tract 29283
in Rancho La Quinta; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 171" day of November, 1998, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving the
subdivision of 29 acres into 81 single family and other common lots in Rancho La
Quinta, more particularly described as:
Being a portion of Parcels 6, 7, 10, 11 and 13 of Parcel Map 20469; SW
1 /4 of Section 32, T5S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, Tract Map 28912 was recorded with the County of Riverside
Recorder's Office on September 29, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13.20.11 5 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
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 t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-
421) and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
RESOPCTT28912-Greg T. 136
��'7
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 28912
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
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:
A. The proposed Final Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta
General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the
General Plan Update allowing a density of 2 to 4 units per acre; therefore,
provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan 84-004
designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single family
dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 28912 is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum)•
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure improvements in the project conform
to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as
designed. Private streets provide access to all lots and to adjacent tracts. The
density and design standards for the Tract comply with the Land Use Element
of the General Plan (Chapter 2) and the Specific Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
RESOPCTT28912-Greg T.
137
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 28912
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing
overhead transmission lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they
were installed pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and
direction of the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Mitigated Negative Declaration on file with the Community Development
Department; and
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Amending Tract Map
28912 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
RESOPCTT28912-Greg T.
136
3 6 ��
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 28912
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of May, 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
RESOPCTT28912-Greg T. i 3 3
,,� 371)
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- RECOMMENDED
AMENDING TRACT MAP 28912, RANCHO LA QUINTA
T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
2. The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of
the City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment
#4), GPA 2001-073, EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City
of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole
discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
3. Amending Tract Map No. 28912 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 permit or building permit for construction of
any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain
permits and/or clearances from the following Departments or 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 (per letter dated August 19, 1998)
• Imperial Irrigation District
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
COND PC TR 28912 - GREG
Page I of 13
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 2
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 Notice of Intent
received from the CWQCB 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.
5. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the Infrastructure
Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
6. All easements, rights of way and other property rights required of the tentative
map or otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development
and functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise
conferred, prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or a waiver of parcel
map. Conferrals shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements
to the City for emergency vehicles and for access to and maintenance,
construction, and reconstruction of essential improvements located on street,
drainage or common lots or within utility and drainage easements.
7. Prior to approval of a final map, parcel map or grading plan, 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
COND PC TR 28912 - GREG
14_i
Page 2 of 13, 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 3
10. Dedications required of this development include:
a. Avenue 50: 50-foot half of 100-foot right of way
b. Private street lot "A": 33 feet
C. Private street lots "B" through F: 37 feet (may be reduced to 33 feet if
parking is restricted on one side including signing and provisions for
homeowner association enforcement of the restriction)
d. Multi -use drive at north end of Lot "D": 29-foot right of way
The applicant shall dedicate or grant the public right of way on the final map or
within sixty days of written request by the City - whichever is earlier.
11. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot public utility easements contiguous with
and along both sides of all private streets.
12. The applicant shall grant flood easements to CVWD for all areas below the
elevation of 50.00 feet which are not drainage isolated (to elevation 50.00)
from the La Quinta Evacuation Channel.
13. The applicant shall create a 20-foot perimeter setback along Avenue 50 (20-foot
average depth if a meandering wall design is installed). The setback shall apply
to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder parcels, well sites and
power substation sites.
Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks,
the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes.
14. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access along all Avenue 50
frontage.
15. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access
to utility lines and structures, mailbox clusters and common areas.
16. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any
portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and
the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the
property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer.
FINAL MAP(S)
17. 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
�41
COND PC TR 28912 - GREG " Paaee 3 on 13+
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 4
media and in a program format 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
18. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted
on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading,"
"Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping". All plans except precise grading
plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans
shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the
Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed.
Grading and drainage plans within or directly affecting the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel shall have signature blocks for CVWD.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall include sidewalks, gates and entryways.
"Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation,
lighting, and perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the
City Engineer.
19. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant
may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City.
20. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to
the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they
may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of
construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall
update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be
converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the
plans.
143
COND PC TR 28912 - GREG Page 4 of 13 - 3 '�
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 5
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
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 listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other
agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for
telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements
shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation
from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for
telephone service to lots within the development.
23. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative
approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), 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, the City shall have the right
to halt issuance of building permits or final building inspections or otherwise
withhold approvals related to the development of the project until the applicant
makes satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made
other arrangements satisfactory to the City.
144
COND PC TR 28912 - GREG Page 5 of 13 ., j ,
3
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 6
GRADING
25. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand
nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with
other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments.
26. 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.
27. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report with the
grading plan.
28. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must be
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The
grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and
shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist.
A statement shall appear on 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.
29. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting
properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development.
Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three
feet except for lots within a tract, but not sharing common street frontage,
where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If compliance with this
requirement is impractical, the City will consider and may approve alternatives
which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner
dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
30. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications, stamped and signed by a California registered civil engineer or
surveyor. The certifications shall list approved pad elevations, actual elevations,
and the difference between the two, if any. The data shall be organized by lot
number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
145
COND PC TR 28912 - GREG Page 6 of 13 �U
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 7
DRAINAGE
31. The applicant shall install City approved nuisance water percolation
improvements for nuisance water, with no water directed to the La Quinta
Evacuation Channel. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved
hydrology and drainage plan for Rancho La Quinta.
32. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater or nuisance water directly or
indirectly to public waterways, the applicant and, subsequently, the
Homeowners' Association shall be responsible for any sampling and testing of
the development's effluent which may required under the City's NPDES Permit
or other city or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other
obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. If such
discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions
in the CC&R's for these potential obligations.
UTILITIES
33. Existing and proposed utilities Withifil OF adjoeent to the proposed development
9hall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 KV are exempt frorn
this requirern Existing overhead lines and all proposed utilities within or
adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground, unless
otherwise permitted by General Plan Amendment 2000-073.
34. Where hardscape improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be
installed prior to the hardscape. The applicant shall provide certified reports of
trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
35. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement
program. Any property within this development which has not been subdivided
in accordance with this tentative map 60 days after the program is in effect
shall be subject to the program.
36. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with
the General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
a. OFF -SITE STREETS
i. Avenue 48 between Dune Palms and Adams Street - Prior to
146
COND PC TR 28912 - GREG Page 7 of 13 .
37?
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 8
approval of any final map or issuance of any construction or
building permits within this tentative map, the applicant shall
reimburse the City for one half of the cost of improvements to this
street. This cost shall be $622,304.
ii. Avenue 48 between Dune Palms Road and Jefferson Street and
Avenue 50 along the Rancho La Quinta frontage - Secure the cost
of applicant's half of these streets, including signals, on a pro rata
basis. Basis shall be 80% of the total number of residential units
planned for the area lying east and south of the La Quinta
Evacuation Channel and more than one quarter mile west of
Jefferson Street. This cost shall be $622,304.
Construction of the improvements (Avenue 50) and payment of
the reimbursement obligation (Avenue 48) secured with this map
shall occur as directed by the City but, unless warranted to serve
traffic from the Rancho La Quinta development, shall not exceed
the pro rata share of this tentative map without the concurrence
of the applicant.
b. PRIVATE STREETS AND CULS DE SAC
Residential Single -Loaded - 33 feet between backs of curbs.
ii. Residential Double -Loaded - 37 feet between backs of curbs (33
feet if parking is restricted to one side with appropriate signing and
provisions established for homeowners' association enforcement
of the restriction.
iii. Cul de sac curb radius - 45'
iv. Multi -use drive at north end of Lot D - 28-foot travel width
V. Typical wedge curb section - revise 3/4" lip section from a radius
to a vertical lip with 1 /8" batter
37. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs,
markings and other devices, raised medians where required, street name signs,
and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required.
38. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development
147
CondPC Tr. 28912 Page 8 of 13 3/3
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 9
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).
39. 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 and access gates shall be
stamped and signed by California -registered professional engineer(s).
40. Street right of way geometry for culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner
cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801,
and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
41. 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. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to
normal curbing prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot.
42. 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 are
as follows:
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
43. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (<two years old at the time of
construction) for base, paving and curb/gutter materials. Submittals 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 (<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.
44. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings
only when the buildings have improved street and 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
CondPC Tr. 28912 Page 9 of 13 y q p
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 10
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.
LANDSCAPING
45. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks and common lots.
46. Landscape and irrigation plans for common lots, setbacks and medians 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.
47. 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.
48. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn
or spray irrigation within 5-feet of curbs along public streets.
49. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are
coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures.
50. The applicant shall construct the perimeter wall and landscaping adjacent to the
tract prior to final inspection and occupancy of any homes within the tract. The
design for the wall shall be approved by the Community Development
Department prior to construction.
PUBLIC SERVICES
51. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline
Transit and/or the City.
Y40
CondPC Tr. 28912 Page 10 of 13 ��
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 11
QUALITY ASSURANCE
52. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
53. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers,
geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other licensed professionals, as
appropriate, to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish
and sign accurate record drawings.
54. 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
and specifications. Where retention basins are installed, testing shall include a
sand filter percolation test, as approved by the City Engineer, after required tract
improvements are complete and soils have been permanently stabilized.
55. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City
reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City
Engineer. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings", "As -Built" or
"As -Constructed" 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
56. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of all required
improvements until, in the case of public improvements, expressly released from
said responsibility by the City.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
57. 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.
PaeIIof 13Y5O
CondPC Tr.28912 B
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 12
FIRE DEPARTMENT
58. Prior to issuance recordation of final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one
blue line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for
review/approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and
spacing, and the system shall meet fire flow requirements. Plans shall be
signed/approved by a registered Civil Engineer and the local water company
with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system
is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Department'.
59. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD standard W-33 shall be located at each
street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no
portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum
fire flow shall be 1500 gpm for a two hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot
reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of streets directly in line with fire
hydrants.
60. The required water system, including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on an individual lot.
61. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the
construction of the models only. Plans for a temporary water system must be
submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building
permits.
62. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant will provide alternate or
secondary access as approved by the Public Works Department and Fire
Department.
63. Gate entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the traffic
lane(s) serving that gate. All gates providing access from a road to a driveway
shall be located at least 30 feet from the roadway and shall open to allow a
vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one-way road
with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 40 foot turning
radius shall be used.
CondPC Tr. 28912
Page 12 of 13
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 28912
May 8, 2001
Page 13
64. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a
Fire Department override system consisting of Knox Key operated switches,
Series KS-2P with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox
Company. Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted
to the Fire Department for review/approval prior to installation.
MISCELLANEOUS
65. Preliminary development plans for all common area lots, the recreation lot "H",
and pool lot "I" shall be approved by the Community Development Department
prior to approval of the final map by the City Council. Included shall be a
schedule for installation of these improvements.
CoDdPC Tr. 28912
Page 13 of 13
IL
383
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF TRACT MAP 27835 (AMENDMENT
#1) TO ALLOW A CHANGE TO CONDITION #12
REQUIRING UNDER GROUNDING OF OVERHEAD
TRANSMISSION LINES FOR A SINGLE FAMILY
CONDOMINIUM PROJECT IN RANCHO LA QUINTA
CASE NO.: AMENDING TRACT MAP 27835
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 81" day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 12 of City Council Resolution 94-4 to allow an exemption to
the under grounding of existing overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District high
voltage power lines (92 Kv) for a subdivision of 36 acres into seven lots for 92
condominium units and clubhouse and other common lots, located on the south side
of Avenue 48 and west of the Evacuation Channel in Rancho La Quinta connecting to
Tracts 27840, 29306 and 29457; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 131 day of January, 1994, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving the
subdivision of 36 acres into residential (92 condos) and other common lots, located
on the south side of Avenue 48 and west of the Evacuation Channel, more particularly
described as:
Being a portion of Parcels 3, 5, 8 and 9 of Parcel Map 20469; North '/2
of Sections 32, T5S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, Tract Map 27835 was recorded with the County of Riverside
Recorder's Office on June 30, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13.20.1 15 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
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 t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-
RESOPCTT27835 Greg T. -
153
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 27835
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
421) and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings:
A. The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is within a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions
of the General Plan Update allowing a density of 2 to 4 units per acre; therefore,
provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan 84-004
designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single family
dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 27835 is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum).
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure improvements in the project conform
to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as
designed. The density and design standards for the Tract comply with the Land
Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2) and the Specific Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
RESOPCTT27835 Greg T. -
154
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 27835
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing
overhead transmission lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they
were installed pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and
direction of the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Addendum on file with the Community Development Department; and
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Amending Tract Map
27835 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
RESOPCTT27835 Greg T. - J 8 r
J
155
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 27835
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 8" day of May, 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
RESOPCTT27835 Greg T. -
150
387
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RECOMMENDED
AMENDING TRACT MAP 27835, RANCHO LA QUINTA
T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1. The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of
the City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment
#4), GPA 2001-073, EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City
of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole
discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Amending Tract Map No. 27835 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).
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of
any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain
permits and/or clearances from the following Departments or 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 (per letter dated August 19, 1998)
• Imperial Irrigation District
• 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.
Cond PC Tract 27835 Orig - Greg T. Page 1 of 12
157
383
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 2
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 Notice of Intent
received from the CWQCB 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. The approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable
provisions of SP 84-004 and applicable Development Agreement.
5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the
City's adopted Infrastructure Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of
building permits.
6. Construction shall comply with all local and State building code requirements as
determined by the Building and Safety Director.
7. Applicant shall insure that landscaping and utility plans are coordinated to
provide visual screening of aboveground utility structures.
8. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and
irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval
with respect to t he District's Water Management Program.
TRACT AND BUILDING DESIGN
9. Development of the project site shall comply with amended map Exhibit "A" for
TTM 27835, and the following conditions, which conditions shall take
precedence in the event of any conflict with the provisions of the tentative tract
map.
10. The development of custom, single family lots, if any shall be governed by the
following:
A. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for any house within TTM
27835, landscaping/groundcover shall be installed and appropriately
maintained.
B. All roof -mounted equipment shall be screened form view at all sides by
design of the house. All ground -mounted mechanical equipment shall be
screened from view by methods approved by the Community
Development Department.
389
Cond PC Tract 27835 Orig - Greg T. Page 2 of 12 158
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 3
C. No two-story units shall be allowed within 75-feet of 48`h Avenue per
Specific Plan 84-004.
D. All dwelling units shall have a minimum two car garage (attached or
detached) measuring 20' by in overall size.
1 1 . Any minor changes in lot mix, sizes, lines, or shapes, or street alignments, shall
be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department prior to
any final map approvals for recordation.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
�li+�,�tH \l�l\I�l.t�.l\\i.�il l�l �lil�l�li.��.�\II �\l�l���.\�11�\�l�l�l�\��i,�i1��\�1���,��,�,�,�iti� ��� ����„i.�..� �•
Existing overhead lines and
all proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be
installed underground, unless otherwise permitted by General Plan Amendment
2000-073.
13. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground
utilities shall be installed prior to the surface improvements. The applicant shall
provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the
City Engineer.
14. All conditions and requirements of CVWD (letter dated Nov. 10, 1993) shall be
met.
MANAGEMENT
15. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall submit to the
Community Development Director the following documents which shall
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the open space/recreation areas
and private streets and drives shall be maintained in accordance with the intent
and purpose of this approval.
A. The document to convey title
B. Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions to be recorded; and,
C. Management and maintenance agreement to be entered into with the
unit/lot owners of this land division.
The CC and R's shall be recorded at the same that the final map is recorded.
Cond PC Tract 27835 Ong - Greg T.
Page 3 of 12 150
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 4
A Homeowners' Association with the unqualified right to access the owners of
the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs, shall be established and
continuously maintained. The association shall have the right to lien the
property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. Such
lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrance other than a first deed of
trust, provided that such deed of trust is made in good faith and for value and
is of record prior to the lien of the HOA.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
16. Applicant shall construct, or enter into a secured agreement to construct, the
on- and off -site grading, streets, utilities, landscaping, on -site common area
improvements, and any other improvements required by these conditions and
shall meet all other obligations or secured said obligations before approval of
this tentative map or before any final map(s) under this tentative tract map as
specified hereinafter.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing
structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
17. If tract improvements are phased with multiple final maps, off -site
improvements and tract -wide improvements (i.e., perimeter walls, common
areas and setback landscaping, and gates) required of any final map within this
map unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Tentative map
improvements shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final
map.
The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the
installation of offsite and tract -wide improvements with development of two or
more final maps within the tentative map.
18. The applicant shall reimburse the development to the north for the actual cost
to that development for construction of improvements to the south side of
Avenue 48 contiguous to this tentative tract. This reimbursement may be
deferred until Phase II of the Rancho La Quinta development provided the
applicant provides security in guarantee of the reimbursement.
DEDICATIONS
19. Applicant shall dedicate or deed public street right-of-way and utility easements
in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific
plans and as required by the City Engineer.
Cond PC Tract 27835 Ong -Greg T. yPage 4 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 5
Dedications or deeds required for approval of this tract include:
A. Avenue 48: 55-feet width right-of-way
Street right-of-way geometry for cul-de-sacs, knuckle turns and corner cutbacks
shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801 and #805
respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
20. The applicant shal dedicate common -area setback lots, of a minimum width as
noted, adjacent to the following street rights of way:
/_�TAVMi M— 1 E WZ81 N
Minimum widths may be used as average widths for meandering wall designs.
Where sidewalks, bike paths, and/or equestrian trails are required, the applicant
shall dedicate or deed blanket easements over the setback lots for those
purposes.
21. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights along the following streets from
lots abutting the streets:
A. Avenue 48
Access along these streets shall be restricted to approved project entries and
emergency access locations.
22. The applicant shall dedicate or deed any easements necessary for placement of
and access to utility lines and structures, park lands, drainage basins, common
areas, and mailbox clusters.
23. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any
portion of the property included in this tentative map between the date of
approval by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s)
covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved
by the City Engineer.
TRACT DESIGN
24. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance (Chapter 9.150)
shall be met concerning all supplemental accessory facilities, as determined by
the City Engineer, to discourage on -street parking by residents or guests.
Cond PC Tract 27835 Ong - Greg T.
3!12 16
Page 5 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 6
GRADING
25. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant
shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in
accordance with Chapter 6.16 of the 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.
26. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering
investigation shall be conducted. The report of the investigation ("the soils
report") shall be submitted with the grading plan.
27. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan must
meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to approval of any final map(s).
The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report
and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering
geologist. A statement shall appear on 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.
Prior to issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall provide a separate
document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer,
geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The
document shall, for each building pad in the tract, state the pad elevation
approve on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the
difference, if any. The data shall be organized by the trat phase and lot number
and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
28. The tract shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity
to flow out of the tract through a designated overflow and into the historic
drainage relief route. Similarly, the tract shall be graded to receive storm flow
from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow.
29. Storm water runoff produced in 24 hours during a 100-year storm shall be
retained on -site or channeled in facilities on the adjacent golf course or piped to
the adjacent CVWD stormwater channel. Drainage from Lot C and G shall not
be conveyed via surface drainage or culvers without the approval of the City
Engineer. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall
extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets.
Cond PC Tract 27835 Orig - Greg T.
333 i6
Page 6 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 7
30. In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be considered to be
zero unless applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise.
For common retention basins a trickling sand filter and leachfield of a design
approved by the City Engineer shall be installed to percolate nuisance water.
The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons/day per
1,000 feet of drainage area.
The retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. If retention is on individual
lots, the retention depth shall not exceed two feet. If retention is in one or
more common retention basins, the retention depth shall not exceed six feet.
31. The design of the tract shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels
or frequencies in any area outside the tract.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
32. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement
program is in effect 60-days prior to recordation of any final map for this
development, the development shall be subject to the provisions of the
Ordinance.
If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement
program, the applicant shall design and construct street improvements as listed
below.
33. Improvement plans for all on -site and offsite street and access gates shall be
prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and
constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted Standard Drawings, and as
approved by the City Engineer.
Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans' design procedure for a
20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading.
Minimum structural sections are as follows:
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section for use during
development of the tract, the partial section shall be designed with a strength
equivalent to the 20-year design strength.
Y. 6 3
Cond PC Tract 27835 Orig - Greg T. Page 7 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 8
34. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs,
markings and other devices, raised medians where required, street name signs,
and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required.
35. The City Engineer may require miscellaneous incidental improvements and
enhancements to existing improvements as necessary to integrate the new work
with existing improvements and provide a finished product conforming with City
standards and practices. This includes street width transitions extending
beyond the tract boundaries.
36. The following street and landscaping improvements shall be constructed to
conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses:
A. Lots A, C and G - 26' (18+18 for one way couplet on Lot C). Lots A,
C and G shall be posted "No Parking" with a sufficient number of signs
that at least one sign is clearly visible from each potential on -street
parking opportunity.
B. Lot B - 36' (20+20 for one-way couplet at entry drive).
LANDSCAPING
37. The applicant shall provide landscaping improvements in required setbacks,
common, and median lots along the following streets:
A. Avenue 48
The applicant is encouraged to minimize steep slope designs within the
perimeter landscaping setback areas. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no
lawn or spray irrigation within 5-feet of street curb.
38. Landscape and irrigation plans for common lots, setbacks and medians shall be
signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape areas shall
have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City
Engineer. Common basins and park areas shall be designed with a turf grass
surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment.
Landscape and irrigation plans shall meet the requirements of and be signed by
the Community Development Director, the City Engineer, the CVWD, and the
Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner.
64
Cond PC Tract 27835 Ong -Greg T. Page 8 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 9
QUALITY ASSURANCE
39. The City is contemplating adoption of a quality -assurance program for privately -
funded construction. If the program is adopted prior to the issuance of permits
for construction of the improvements required of this map, the applicant shall
fully comply with the quality -assurance program.
If the quality -assurance program has not been adopted, the applicant shall
employ construction quality -assurance measures with meet the approval of the
City Engineer.
40. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers,
geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other licensed professionals, as
appropriate, to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish
and sign accurate record drawings.
41. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City
reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City
Engineer. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings", "As -Built" or
"As -Constructed" 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.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
42. Schedule A fire protection approved Super fire hydrants (6" X 4" X 2.5" X 2.5")
shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart
in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a
fire hydrant.
43. The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 2,500
g.p.m. and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 1,500
g.p.m. for a two-hour duration at 20 psi.
44. Prior to issuance recordation of final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one
blue line copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for
review/approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and
spacing, and the system shall meet fire flow requirements. Plans shall be
signed/approved by a registered Civil Engineer and the local water company
with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system
is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Department".
Cond PC Tract 27835 Orig - Greg T.
165
Page 9 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 10
45. The required water system, including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on an individual lot.
46. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a
Fire Department override system consisting of Knox Key operated switches,
Series KS-2P with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox
Company. Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted
to the Fire Department for review/approval prior to installation.
47. If public use type buildings are to be constructed, additional fire protection may
be required. Fire flows and hydrant location will be stipulated when building
plans are reviewed by the Fire Department.
MAINTENANCE
48. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of landscaping
and related improvements.
49. The applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the subdivision such as
common lots, landscaped setbacks and retention basins until those areas have
been accepted for maintenance by the HOA. The applicant shall maintain all
other improvements until final acceptance of tract improvements by the City
Council.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
50. 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
51. On- and off -site grading, drainage, street, lighting, landscaping and irrigation,
park, gate and perimeter wall plans shall be submitted to the Engineering
Department for plan checking. The plans are not approved for construction until
they have been signed by the City Engineer.
52. Prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy for buildings within the tract, the
applicant shall traffic control devices and street name signs along access roads
to those buildings.
Cond PC Tract 27835 Orig - Greg T. Page 10 of 12 166
3y 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 11
53. Appropriate approvals shall be secured prior to establishing any construction or
sales facilities, and/or signs on the subject property.
54. Restroom facilities for the grounds keepers shall be provided in the vicinity of
golf course, and a permanent golf course and homeowners maintenance facility
shall be constructed on the property to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director.
55. All outdoor lighting shall comply with Section 9.60.160 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
56. Applicant/Developer shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to
implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The applicant/developer is
required to work with Waste Management in setting up the following programs
for this project:
A. Developer shall prepare a plan to provide enlarged trash enclosures for
inclusion of separate facilities for storage of recyclables such as glass,
plastics, newsprint and steel and aluminum cans.
B. Developer shall provide proper on -site storage facilities within the project
for green waste associated with golf course and common area
maintenance. Compost materials shall be stored for pick-up by Waste
Management, or an authorized hauler for transplant to an appropriate
facility.
C. Curbside recycling service shall be provided in areas where no centralized
trash/recycling bins are provided or utilized.
57. The specific plan requires 10 acres of land to be dedicated for park purposes.
7.8 acres has been dedicated to date. The balance of 2.2 acres shall be paid
as a in -lieu fee prior to recordation of the final map.
58. Per the Specific Plan Conditions of Approval, a contribution of $100,000.00 as
a fire mitigation measure, shall be paid prior to issuance of the first building
permit for production of any custom homes.
59. A complete pedestrian and bicycle path system shall be provided within the
project. The design shall be subject to the approval of the Community
Development Director.
16'7
Cond PC Tract 27835 Ong - Greg T. Page I I of 12
�� 3y
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 27835
May 8, 2001
Page 12
60. Per SP 84-004, a noise study shall be completed prior to sidewalk and perimeter
wall construction beginning to insure compliance with applicable noise
standards.
61. The Dune Palms entry design layout (traffic) shall be approved by the Public
Works Department, Fire Marshal and Community Development Department prior
to recordation of the final map.
62. The parking lot layout for Lot "E" shall be reviewed and approved by the Public
Works and Community Development Departments. Landscaping plans shall be
approved by the Community Development for Lot E.
63. Lot "F" shall be used as a parking lot for Phase II of the Casitas product. The
lot shall be installed prior to final occupancy of the 10`h unit in Phase II.
Cond PC Tract 27835 Ong - Greg T. Page 12 of 12
33J0 -168
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING TRACT MAP 29306 TO
ALLOW A CHANGE TO CONDITION #34 OF CITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION 99-99 REQUIRING UNDER
GROUNDING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINES
FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
IN RANCHO LA QUINTA
CASE NO.: TRACT MAP 29306, AMENDMENT #1
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8'h day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 34 of City Council Resolution 99-99 to allow an exemption
to the under grounding of existing overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District
high voltage power lines (92 Kv) for a subdivision of 26.4 acre site into 75 single
family and other common lots, located on the south side of 48'h Avenue and 500-feet
east of Dune Palms Road in Rancho La Quinta with connections to Tract 29457 and
27835; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 3" day of August, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving the
subdivision of 26.4 acre site into 75 single family and other common lots, located on
the south side of 481h Avenue and 500-feet east of Dune Palms Road, more particularly
described as:
Being a portion of Parcels 12, 14, 15, 18 and 19 of Parcel Map 20469
as filed in Book 140 of Maps on Pages 95-100 inclusive, County of
Riverside, State of California; N'/z of Section 32, T5S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, Tract Map 29306 was recorded with the County of Riverside
Recorder's Office creating said lots on April 6, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13.20.1 15 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
RESOPCTT29306 - Greg 169
4 01-)
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 29306
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that
the Community Development Department t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-
421) and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings:
A. The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is within a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions
of the General Plan Update allowing a density of 2 to 4 units per acre; therefore,
provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan 84-004
designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single family
dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 29306 is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum).
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure 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 internal streets
planned under this tract and Tract 27835. The density and design standards
for the tract will comply with the Land Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter
2) and the Specific Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
RESOPCTT29306 - Greg a r�
1L d U
404
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 29306
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision will not cause serious public health problems
because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal
requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing overhead transmission
lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they were installed
pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and direction of
the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Addendum on file with the Community Development Department; and,
RESOPCTT29306 - Greg
171.
402
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 29306
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Amending Tract Map
29306 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 8th day of May, 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
RESOPCTT29306 - Greg 172
-403
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29306, RANCHO LA QUINTA
T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
GENERAL
1 . The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City
of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's
approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and holding harmless
the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment #4), GPA 2001-073,
EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City of La Quinta shall have the
right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. 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)•
approval shall expire and become mull and void an August 3, 2001, unless an
extension of tmfne as granted aceaMing to th, requirements of Section 13.12.150 o+
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall
obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from
those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans,
applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the
plans.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater
discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits,
the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's
Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The
applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is
available for inspection at the project site.
173
AdCond PC29306RancfiLQ.wpd-GREG - , - 4 L) i Page I of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
4. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the infrastructure fee
program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
5. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall consolidate or reconfigure
underlying lots and parcels so that none are reduced to an illegal size or shape by the
overlay of this map.
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. Dedications or grants required of this development include:
A. Lots A & D (Private Collectors): 37 feet
B. Lots B & C (Private Culs de Sac): 37 feet with 45.5-foot bulb radius.
C. Flood easements to CVWD for all areas below the elevation of 50.00 feet which
are not drainage isolated (to elevation 50.00) from the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel.
9. Right of way geometry for culs de sac, 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, 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.
1 1 . The applicant shall create a 20-foot perimeter setback along Avenue 48. The 20-foot
minimum depth may be used as an average depth for meandering wall designs. The
setback requirement applies to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder
parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
174
1$ �0ke2 of 12
A:\Cond PC29306RanchLQ.wpd - GREG ll/l J
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
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, mailbox clusters and common areas.
13. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to Avenue 48 except for the 30-
foot driveway centered approximately 35 feet west of the most easterly boundary of
Lot 77.
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. 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.
FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(S)
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
r�75
•�i V r' �
Page 3of l2
AXond PC29306RanchLQ.wpd - GREG
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until
they are signed.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths,
entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include
irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise Grading"
plans shall normally include perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
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.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
20. 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.
21. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement
costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the
schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in
the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
AACond PC29306PanchLQ.wpd - GREG
407 17G
Page 4 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
Estimates for utilities and other 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.
22. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals
(e.g., a Site Development Permit), off -site improvements and common improvements
(e.g., perimeter walls & landscaping, common lots and entry 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.
23. 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
24. 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.
25. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a 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. The plan must be approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of a grading permit. 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.
4U�71
Page 5 of 12
A:\Good PC29306RanchLQ.wpd - GREG
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
26. 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.
27. 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. If compliance with this requirement is impractical, the City will
consider and may approve alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance
difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
28. 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.
29. 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.
30. 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
31. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for
Rancho La Quinta. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner.
32. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater to the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and
testing of the development's effluent 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. If such
I 178
AXond PC29306RanchLQ.wpd - GREG 4 U Page 6 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the
CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations.
UTILITIES
33. 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.
34. Existing overhead lines and all proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed
development shall be installed underground.
Existing overhead lines and all proposed utilities within
or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground, unless
otherwise permitted by General Plan Amendment 2000-073.
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 TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
36. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program.
Any property within this specific plan which has not received final development
approval when the program takes effect may be subject to the program as determined
by the City.
37. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the
General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall
conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
11 Avenue 48 and Avenue 50 Pro Rata Reimbursement - The applicant shall
remunerate the City for this Tentative Tract's pro-rata share of Avenue 48
and Avenue 50 improvements as required by Specific Plan 84-004.
2) Construct six-foot meandering sidewalk along Avenue 48.
B. ON -SITE PRIVATE STREETS
1 179
A:\Cond PC29306RanchLQ.wpd - GREG 11 Page 7 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
1) Lots A & D (Private Collectors) - 36 feet between curbfaces.
2) Lots B & C (Private Culs de Sac) - 36 feet between curbfaces, 45-foot curb
radius on cul de sac bulbs.
38. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and
other devices; street name signs and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not
required.
39. 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).
40. 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.
41. Culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County
Standard Drawings #800/800a, #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer.
42. 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 curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be vertical
0/8" 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.
43. 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" 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"
AACond PC29306RanchLQ.wpd-GREG
!so
1 41 Page 8 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
44. 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.
45. 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.
LANDSCAPING
46. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks and common lots, and
park areas.
47. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention
basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect and
comply with Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code.
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.
48. 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.
49. Front yard landscaping for future houses shall consist of a minimum of two shade
trees (1.5-inch and larger caliper size) and 10 five gallon shrubs. Three additional
shade trees (1.0-inch caliper) shall be required for corner lots houses. All trees shall
be double staked to prevent wind damage.
A:Wond PC29306RanchLQ.wpd -GREG
-• 4 Sage 9 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
PUBLIC SERVICES
50. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline Transit
and/or the City.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
51. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
52. 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.
53. 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.
54. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City Engineer and
the precise grading plans. 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
55. 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 they are accepted by the appropriate
public agency.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
56. 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.
57. Plan check fees required by the Riverside Country Fire Department shall be paid when
plans are submitted for review and approval.
Y�r)
413age 10 of 12
A:\Cond PC29306RanchLQ.wpd - GREG
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La Quinta
May 8, 2001
FIRE DEPARTMENT
58. Fire hydrants in accordance with Coachella Valley Water District Standard W-33 shall
be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any
direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant.
Minimum fire flow shall be 1,000 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot
reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of streets directly in line with fire hydrants.
59. Applicant/developer will provide written certification for the appropriate water
company that the required fire hydrant(s) are either existing or that financial
arrangements have been made to provide them.
60. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy
of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review/approval. Plans shall
conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will meet the
fire flow requirements. Plans will be signed and approved by the registered Civil
Engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "/ certify that
the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by
the Riverside County Fire Department."
61. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the
appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on
an individual lot.
62. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of
the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the
Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits.
MISCELLANEOUS
63. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file
documents for plan checking purposes.
64, Applicable conditions of Specific Plan 84-004 as amended shall be met prior to
building permit issuance.
65. The layout and design of the permanent tract access gates shall be approved by the
Community Development Department after review and approval by the Fire
Department.
A:\fond PC29306RanchLQ.wpd - GREG
414 183
Page 11 of 12
Planning Commission Resolution 2001- _
Tentative Tract Map 29306, Rancho La u
Qinta
May 8, 2001
66. This tract shall be annexed into the Rancho La Quinta Homeowners' Association (HOA)
ensuring maintenance of common open space, perimeter landscaping, private roads,
security, and architectural consistency pursuant to the requirements of Specific Plan
84-004.
184
A:\Cond PC29306RanchLQ.wpd - GREG 1 ` 41 ige 12 of 12
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING TRACT MAP 25154
(AMENDMENT #1) TO MODIFY CONDITION #20 OF
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 92-18 REQUIRING
UNDER GROUNDING OF OVERHEAD
TRANSMISSION LINES FOR A SINGLE FAMILY
SUBDIVISION IN RANCHO LA QUINTA
CASE NO.: AMENDING TRACT MAP 25154
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 81h day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending City Council Resolution 92-18 to allow an exemption to the under grounding
of existing overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District high voltage power lines
(92 Kv) for a subdivision of 27.5 acres into 98 single family and other common lots,
located on the northeast corner of Sagebrush Avenue and Date Palm Drive in Rancho
La Quinta connecting to Tract 28343; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 4Lh day of February, 1992, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving a one year
time extension for Tentative Tract Map 25154, a subdivision of 27.5 acres into 98
residential and other common lots, located on the northeast corner of Sagebrush
Avenue and Date Palm Drive under Resolution 92-18; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 5th day of December, 1989, approve TTM 25154, subject to conditions, more
particularly described as:
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 25187; SYz of Section 31, T5S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, Tract Map 25154 was recorded with the County of Riverside
Recorder's Office on June 24, 1992; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13.20.115 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
RESOPCTT25154 Greg T - p
18,
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 25154
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
WHEREAS, said Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The
Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended;
Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community
Development Department t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-421) and has
determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant adverse impact
on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings:
A. The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is within a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions
of the General Plan Update allowing a density of two to four units per acre;
therefore, provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan
84-004 designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single
family dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 27835 is consistent with
the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum)•
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure improvements in the project conform
to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as
designed. Access for the single family lots occurs via existing private streets.
The density and design standards for the Tract comply with the Land Use
Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2) and the Specific Plan.
RESOPCTT25154 Greg T
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 25154
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004, The existing
overhead transmission lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they
were installed pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and
direction of the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
RESOPCTT25154 Greg T -
,: � 4Ifl�8 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 25154
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Addendum on file with the Community Development Department; and
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Tract Map 25154
(Amendment #1) 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 8`h day of May, 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
RESOPCTT25154 Greg T
„ 41Q
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RECOMMENDED
AMENDING TRACT MAP 25154, RANCHO LA QUINTA
T.D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GENERAL
1 . The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of
the City's approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and
holding harmless the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment
#4), GPA 2001-073, EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City
of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole
discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Amending Tract Map No. 25154 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).
3. 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 easements will be done
on a benefit basis, as required by law.
4. The applicant/developer shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded
over any portion of the property included in this tentative map between the date
of approval by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s)
covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved
by the City Engineer.
5. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of
any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain
permits and/or clearances from the following Departments or public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• CV Unified School District
Cond PC Tr. 25154 Greg Page I of 7
18 ��
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 25154
May 8, 2001
Page 2
• Coachella Valley Water District
• Imperial Irrigation District
• US Post Office
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.
6. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit or final inspection, the Applicant
shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development
Department demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and
Mitigation Measures of EA 89-144, which must be satisfied prior to the
issuance of the respective permit(s). The Director may require inspection or
other monitoring to assure such compliance.
CONDITIONS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO GRADING PERMIT(S
7. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan shall
be submitted on 24" by 36" media and must meet the approval of the City
Engineer prior to approval of any final map(s). The grading plan shall conform
with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate
by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on
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.
8. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall provide a separate
document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer,
geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The
document shall, for each building pad in the tract, state the pad elevation
approve on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the
difference, if any. The data shall be organized by the trat phase and lot number
and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times.
9. 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 of the 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.
Cond PC Tr. 25154 Greg `" of 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 25154
May 8, 2001
Page 3
10. 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 landscape
or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved
by the Community Development and Public Works Departments.
11. Drainage disposal facilities shall be provided as required by the City Engineer.
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of the City's Master Plan of
Drainage, including payment of any drainage fees required therewith. The
design facilities shall be capable of handling a 100-year storm. Applicant shall
provide drainage easements as required across lots abutting the La Quinta
Evacuation Channel.
12. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and
irrigation plans to the CVWD for review and approval with respect to the
District's Water Management Program.
13. Developer shall comply with all applicable requirements of the City Fire Marshal.
14. The Developer shall obtain an encroachment permit from the CVWD prior to any
construction within the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. This includes, but is not
limited to, surface improvements, drainage inlets, landscaping, and roadways.
Developer shall install suitable facilities to prohibit access to this right-of-way
from the subject tract.
15. Prior to any issuance of land disturbance permits, the Applicant shall contract
with the University of California Riverside Archaeological Research Unit to
perform a reevaluation of the project site. The results of this evaluation shall
be submitted to the Community Development Department for review, along with
the proposed method of testing for any potentially significant sites identified in
the evaluation. If potentially significant sites are identified, 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 UCR, and shall include methods by which
any significant or potentially significant sites will be inventoried and/or
excavated. A Mitigation and Monitoring Program shall be required to be
submitted, specifying a qualified archaeological monitor, including any assistants
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 representative shall have the authority to
temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of
Cond PC Tr. 25154 Greg
422 191
Page 3 of 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 25154
May 8, 2001
Page 4
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.
CONDITIONS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO FINAL MAP APPROVAURECORDATION
16. 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.
b. The Applicant shall submit street improvement plans that are proposed
by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements, including traffic
signs and markings shall conform to City standards as determined by the
City Engineer and adopted by the La Quinta Municipal Code (3" A.C. over
4" Class 2 Base minimum for residential streets).
17. The Applicant shall acquire and dedicate a 30-foot right-of-way easement over
the property to the south of the subject site (portion of Sagebrush Ave.), for
street construction purposes unless an alternative arrangement is approved by
the Public Works Department.
18. Culs-de-sac streets shall have a minimum outside curb radius of 45-feet.
Present design will require additional right-of-way dedication as sidewalks are
required.
19. The Applicant shall construct or bond for street improvements to the
requirements of the City Engineer and the LQMC, as follows:
a. The interior public street system shall be designed pursuant to the
approved Exhibit "A" (Tract Map) for TTM 25154, and the requirements
of the City Engineer. All streets shall maintain a 2% cross slope from
centerline to edge of pavement. Any variations to the approved street
system design sections shall be subject to review and approval by the
Public Works Department.
20. All utilities will be installed and trenches compacted to City standards prior to
construction of any streets. The soils engineer shall provide the necessary
compaction test reports for review by the City Engineer, as may be required.
Existing overhead lines and all proposed utilities within or adjacent to the
Cond PC Tr. 25154 Greg - "% I 41ta'89 4 of �
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 25154
May 8, 2001
Page 5
proposed development shall be installed underground, unless otherwise
permitted by General Plan Amendment 2000-073.
21. If the Applicant desires to phase tract improvements, tract phasing plans shall
be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer and Community
Development Department prior to recordation of any final map under this
tentative map.
22. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the CVWD. Any necessary
parcels for District facility expansion shall be shown on the Final Map and
conveyed to the District, in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act.
23. The Developer shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Fire Marshal
prior to final map approval.
24. Applicant shall pay in -lieu parkland fees prior to final map approval.
25. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be
submitted tot he Community Development Department for review and approval
prior to final map approval. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the
tract from perimeter internal streets, and surrounding land uses, and recommend
alterative mitigation measures. Recommendations of the study shall be
incorporated into the tract design. The study shall consider use of building
setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers, etc.
26. The Tract layout shall comply with the Zoning Code requirements (i.e., 7,200
square foot lot sizes, etc.).
27. All residential lots within the approved boundaries of TTM 25154 shall only be
conveyed to new ownership with the following declaration:
"This property may be subject to limited or restricted viewshed(s) due to
surrounding preciously approved developments to the north and west of
this tract (Tracts 24545 and 21555). Northerly views will be limited by
approved landscaping and fencing which may be approximately eight to
12-feet above finished grade of this property. Westerly views may be
impacted due to development of two story homes on certain lots within
the Parc La Quinta project. The prospective buyer is urged to investigate
the full range of any potential view impacts prior to committing to any
agreement(s)•"
Cond PC Tr. 25154 Greg Page 5 of 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 25154
May 8, 2001
Page 6
28. Plans for single family houses shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Commission. The approved architectural standards shall be included in the CC
and R's for the tract.
29. Applicant shall submit a unit siting plan at the time of submittals for
architectural review of any phased tract development. Siting plan shall include
two-story locations, if any, and shall be review ed by the Planning Commission
along with the proposed unit types. If lots are sold on an individual basis, the
Applicant understands that approvals of any two-story units on any lot are not
guaranteed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis by the Community
Development Department. If phased tract development occurs, (see Condition
#28) CC and R's are required to be submitted to the City for review prior to final
map recordation; the above restriction shall be noted in the CC and R's, if
required.
30. The westerly termination point of the street shown as Lot "D" shall be gated
with controlled access device that restrict ingress/egress to emergency vehicles.
Permits for the installation of controlled access devices shall be obtained form
the Building and Safety Department and Fire Marshal prior to installation.
31. Applicant shall reimburse the City for 25% of the cost to design and install a
new traffic signal at Washington St. and Sagebrush Ave. intersection.
TRACT DESIGN
32. Prior to any landscape installations, 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, location, and irrigation
systems for all areas to be landscaped. 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; and
C. Exterior lighting plans.
33. Landscaping of all units shall be in compliance with Section 9.60.240 of the
Zoning Ordinance.
Cond PC Tr. 25154 Greg Page 6 of 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Amending Tract Map 25154
May 8, 2001
Page 7
34. Developer shall be required to participate in the installation of a suitable buffer
along the eastern tract boundary, between the residential lots and the future
maintenance facility for the Rancho La Quinta. Mutual participation by the
Developer of this tract and the Developer of Rancho La Quinta shall be required
to provide an acceptable situation for both parties. Design components of the
buffer area may include, but are not limited to walls, berming/landscaping, grade
variations, setbacks, etc. Design of the buffer area shall be subject to review
and approval of the Community Development Dept. The improvement(s) of the
buffer shall be installed at the site of any development activity on either
property; any reimbursement agreement(s) arrangement will be solely the
responsibility of the Developers involved.
35. The Community Development Department shall approve the following uses:
a. Temporary construction facilities;
b. Sales facilities, including their appurtenant signage.
C. On -site advertising/construction signs.
36. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the
City's adopted Infrastructure Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of
building permits.
4Gu^ 195
Cond PC Tr. 25154 Greg Page 7 of 7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF AMENDING TRACT MAP 29283 TO
ALLOW A CHANGE TO CONDITION #37 OF CITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION 99-100 REQUIRING UNDER
GROUNDING OF OVERHEAD TRANSMISSION LINES
FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
IN RANCHO LA QUINTA
CASE NO.: AMENDING TRACT MAP 29283
APPLICANT: T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8th day of May, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
amending Condition No. 37 of City Council Resolution 99-100 to allow an exemption
to the under grounding of existing overhead utility lines on Imperial Irrigation District
high voltage power lines (92 Kv) for a subdivision of 23 acres into 59 single family and
other common lots, located on the northeast corner of 501h Avenue and Orchard Lane
in Rancho La Quinta with connections to Tracts 28912 and 29457; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the V day of August, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing approving the
subdivision of 23 acres into 59 single family and other common lots, located on the
northeast corner of 501h Avenue and Orchard Lane, more particularly described as:
Being a portion of Parcels 6, 7, 10, 11, 13 and 14 of Parcel Map 20469
as filed in Book 140 of Maps on Pages 95-100 inclusive, County of
Riverside, State of California; SW 1 /4 of Section 32, T5S, R7E, SBBM
WHEREAS, Tract Map 29283 was recorded with the County of Riverside
Recorder's Office creating said lots on October 4, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the applicant is requesting to amend a final map pursuant to
Section 13.20.1 15 of the Subdivision Ordinance; and
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 t has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001 -
RESOPCTT29283 Greg
-4G.
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 29283
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 2
4211 and has determined that the proposed project(s) could not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment based on the proposed mitigation measures and
a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings;
A. The proposed Map Amendment is consistent with the City of La Quinta General
Plan and any applicable specific plans.
A Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments are being processed concurrently
with this application to ensuring compliance with City standards and
requirements.
The project is within a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions
of the General Plan Update allowing a density of two to four units per acre;
therefore, provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) are met. Specific Plan
84-004 designates the site as residential and golf course which permits single
family dwellings and golf related facilities. Tract Map 29283 is consistent with
the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Specific Plan 84-
004 provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with
the General Plan, Specific Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences
pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report #90 (Addendum).
B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans.
All designs of streets and infrastructure 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 internal streets
planned under this tract and Tract 28912. The density and design standards
for the Tract comply with the Land Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter
2) and the Specific Plan.
C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially injure fish or wildlife,
or their habitat.
The subject site is graded and is physically suitable for the proposed land
division. This project will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury
RESOPCTT29283 Greg
42497
Planning Commission Resolution 2001
Amending Tract Map 29283
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 3
to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures were completed
at the time the site was rough graded as required by SP 84-004, EIR No. 90
(Addendum), and Parcel Map 20469.
D. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, are not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious
public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on
City, State, and Federal requirements, and Specific Plan 84-004. The existing
overhead transmission lines do not pose a threat adjacent properties in that they
were installed pursuant federal and state requirements under the supervision and
direction of the Imperial Irrigation District personnel.
E. The design of the subdivision, or type of improvements, will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision.
The proposed streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family
lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support
necessary infrastructure improvements as required by SP 84-004.
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 reconfirm the conclusions of Final Environmental Impact
Report No. 90 (Addendum) and Environmental Assessment 98-357 for Specific
Plan 84-004;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and
Mitigated Negative Declaration on file with the Community Development
Department; and
4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Amending Tract Map
29283 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached
conditions.
RESOPCTT29283 Greg
4-�g 19S
Planning Commission Resolution 2001_
Amending Tract Map 29283
T. D. Desert Development
May 8, 2001
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 81h day of May, 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
RESOPCTT29283 Greg
4�rj 99
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
AMENDING TRACT MAP 29283 - RANCHO LA QUINTA
T. D. DESERT DEVELOPMENT
MAY 8, 2001
GENERAL
The developer/property owner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City
of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's
approval of this project including but not limited to indemnifying and holding harmless
the City from any challenge regarding SP 84-004 (Amendment #4), GPA 2001-073,
EA 2001-421, and affiliated subdivision maps. The City of La Quinta shall have the
right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. 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). This
approval shall expire and become null and void in two years, unless an extension of
time is granted according to the requirements of Section 13.12.150 of the Subdivision
Ordinance.
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall
obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from
those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans,
applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the
plans.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater
discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits,
the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's
A:Tund TT29283RanchLQ Original.wpd - Greg T--- Page 1 of 15
'31 inn
r� � I 11
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 2
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. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the infrastructure fee
program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
5. 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.
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. Dedications or grants required of this development include:
A. Avenue 50: 50-foot half of 100-foot right of way
B. Lot A (Via Conquistador) - Private Cul de Sac: 37 feet with 45.5-foot radius at
bulb.
C. Lot B - Private Street: 37-foot width. Width may be reduced to 33 feet with
parking restricted to one side prohibited provided there is adequate off-street
parking for residents and visitors and the applicant provides for perpetual
enforcement of the restrictions by the homeowners association.
D. Lot C - Shared Private Entry: 49 feet (applicant's share reducing to 24.5 feet at
the confluence with neighboring tract's share of the right of way.)
The applicant shall dedicate or grant an easement to the neighboring property
over the shared portion of the entryway. The easement may be conditional upon
receipt of the reciprocal easement from the neighboring property owner.
A:ACond'rT29283RanchLQ Original.wpd - Greg T- — Page 2 of 15
432 201.
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 3
E. The applicant shall grant flood easements to CVWD for all areas below the
elevation of 50.00 feet which are not drainage isolated Ito elevation 50.00) from
the La Quinta Evacuation Channel.
8. Right of way geometry for culs de sac, 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 if necessary for dedicated right and left turn
lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans.
10. If the City Engineer determines that access rights to proposed street rights of way
shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating
the rights of way, the applicant shall grant interim easements over those areas 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.
12. The applicant shall create a 20-foot perimeter setback along Avenue 50. The 20-foot
minimum depth may be used as an average depth for meandering wall designs. The
setback requirement applies to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder
parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the
applicant shall dedicate blanket easements for those purposes.
13. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to
utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common
areas.
14. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to Avenue 50.
15. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate,
from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction,
permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur.
A:ACond TT29283RanchLQ Original.wpd - Greg T--- Page 3 of 15
433 202
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 4
16. 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.
FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(S)
17. 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.
18. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified
engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on 24"
x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets &
Drainage," and "Landscaping." Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for
Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall have
signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until
they are signed.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths,
entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include
irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise Grading"
plans shall normally include perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
A:Tond TT29283RanchLQ Original.wpd - Greg T- -- Page 4 of 15
4�J203
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 5
19. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements
of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire
standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City.
20. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City
Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully
retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior
to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -
constructed conditions.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to
AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
21. Depending on the timing of development of the lots or parcels created by this map and
the status of off -site improvements at that time, the subdivider may be required to
construct improvements, 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
prior to approval of any final map pursuant to this tentative map, the Applicant shall,
at the time of approval of the final map, reimburse the City for the cost of those
improvements.
22. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an
executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations
required by the City prior to 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.
23. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement
costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the
A:\fond TT29283RanchLQ Original.wpd - Greg T--- Page 5 of 15
43-�04
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 6
schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in
the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies
shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or
T.V. cable improvements. However, development -wide improvements shall not be
agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone
authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots
within the development.
24. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals
(e.g., a Site Development Permit), off -site improvements and common improvements
(e.g., perimeter walls & landscaping, common lots and entry 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.
25. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely
manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan or in an improvement agreement,
the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits or final building
inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project or call
upon the surety to complete the improvements.
26. The applicant's obligations for portions of the required improvements may, at the
City's option, be satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement
program if this development becomes subject to such a program.
GRADING
27. 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
A:ACoed TT29293RanchLQ Originalmpd - Greg T— Page 6 of 15
43ru5
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 7
are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the
above conditions have been met.
28. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a 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. The plan must be approved by the City Engineer prior to
issuance of a grading permit. 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.
29. 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.
30. 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. If compliance with this requirement is impractical, the City will
consider and may approve alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance
difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
31. 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.
32. 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.
33. 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.
AXond TT29283RanchLQ Original.wpd - Greg T--
Page 7 of 15
�3t 06
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 8
DRAINAGE
34. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for
Rancho La Quinta. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner.
35. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater to the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and
testing of the development's effluent 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. If such
discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the
CC&R's for meeting these potential obligations.
UTILITIES
36. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility
lines within the right of way and all aboveground 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.
37. Existing OVeFhead 'Ones and all Proposed titildbes "in or adjacen to the Propose-.'
Existing overhead lines and all proposed utilities within
or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground, unless
otherwise permitted by General Plan Amendment 2000-073.
38. 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.
A:ACond'LT29283RanehLQ Original.wpd - Greg T--- Page 8 of 15
33zUr 7
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 9
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
39. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program.
Any property within this specific plan which has not received final development
approval when the program takes effect may be subject to the program as determined
by the City.
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) Avenue 48 and Avenue 50 Pro Rata Reimbursement - The applicant shall
remunerate the City for this Tentative Tract's pro-rata share of Avenue 48
and Avenue 50 improvements as required by Specific Plan 84-004.
Unreimbursed improvements to Avenue 50 (required below) shall be a credit
towards the contribution.
2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - Construct 38-foot half of a 76-foot
improvement (between faces of outside curbs) plus six-foot sidewalk from
the entry drive to Park Street. Construct the full landscape median subject
to reimbursement from funds previously provided by developments on the
south side of Avenue 50.
If the City's currently -planned project to reconstruct the north side of
Avenue 50 is completed, the applicant will not be required to replace that
pavement but, after completion of the median and widening, shall overlay
the full width of the pavement north of the median, slurry seal the full width
south of the median and restripe as directed by the City Engineer.
B. ON -SITE PRIVATE STREETS
11 Lot A (Via Conquistador) - 36 feet between curbfaces or flowlines, 45-foot
curb radius on cul de sac bulb.
2) Lot B - 36 feet between curbfaces or flowlines. Width may be reduced to
32 feet for parking restricted to one side and 28 feet with on -street parking
is prohibited if there is adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors
A:\Cond T129283RanchLQ Oiiginal.wpd -Greg T--- Page 9 of 15
43 208
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 10
and the applicant provides for perpetual enforcement of the restrictions by
the homeowners association.
3) Lot C - (Entryway) - 16 feet between outside and median curbfaces plus
half of the 8-foot median. Construct (if warranted) or secure 50% of the
cost of a traffic signal on Avenue 50.
This entry shall not be opened for use until the full improvement is
constructed unless an interim configuration is approved by the City
Engineer.
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. Culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County
Standard Drawings #80O/800a, #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer.
45. 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 curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be vertical
(1/8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1' in height.
A.ACund TT29283Ranchl-Q Original.wpd - Greg T- -- Page 10 of 15
44f) 209
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 11
Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to final inspection
of permanent building(s) on the lot.
46. Direct access from public streets is limited to the shared entry on Avenue 50.
47. 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" 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"
48. 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.
49. 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.
LANDSCAPING
50. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins, common
lots, and park areas.
AAfondT'r29283RanchLQ Originalmpd-GregT-— Page
1/1 of 15
YY ��Q
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 12
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 and
comply with Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code.
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.
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.
53. Perimeter tract walls and required landscaping shall be constructed prior to final
inspection and occupancy of any homes within the tract unless a phasing plan, or
construction schedule, is approved by the City Engineer.
54. Front yard landscaping for future houses shall consist of a minimum of two shade
trees 0.5-inch and larger caliper size) and 10 five gallon shrubs. Three additional
shade trees (1 .0-inch caliper) shall be required for corner lots houses. All trees shall
be double staked to prevent wind damage.
PUBLIC SERVICES
55, The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline Transit
and/or the City.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
56. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
57. 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.
A.W nd T129283RanchLQ Original.wpd -Greg T--
Page 12 of 15
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 13
58. 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.
59. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City Engineer and
the precise grading plans. 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
60. 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 they are accepted by the appropriate
public agency.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
61. 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.
62. Plan check fees required by the Riverside Country Fire Department shall be paid when
plans are submitted for review and approval.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
63. Fire hydrants in accordance with Coachella Valley Water District Standard W-33 shall
be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any
direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant.
Minimum fire flow shall be 1,000 g.p.m. for a 2-hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot
reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of streets directly in line with fire hydrants.
A:ACond TT29283RanchLQ Originalmpd - Greg -- Page 13 ofe )51 2
443
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 14
64. Applicant/developer will provide written certification for the appropriate water
company that the required fire hydrant(s) are either existing or that financial
arrangements have been made to provide them.
65. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy
of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review/approval. Plans shall
conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system will meet the
fire flow requirements. Plans will be signed and approved by the registered Civil
Engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "Icertify that
the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by
the Riverside County Fire Department."
66. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the
appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on
an individual lot.
67. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of
the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the
Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits.
68. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a Fire
Department override system consisting of Knox Key operated switches, series KS-2P
with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company.
Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted to the Fire
Department for review/approval prior to installation.
69. Gate entrance openings shall be not less than 16 feet in width. All gates shall be
located at least 40 feet from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop
without obstructing traffic on the road. Gates shall have either a secondary power
supply or an approved manual means to release mechanical control of the gate in the
event of loss of primary power.
MISCELLANEOUS
70. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file
documents for plan checking purposes.
71. Applicable conditions of Specific Plan 84-004 as amended shall be met prior to
building permit issuance.
A.Afond TT29293RanchLQ Original.wpd - Greg T- -- Page 14 of 15
4*� �13
Resolution 2001-
Amending Tract Map 29283
May 8, 2001
Page 15
72. The layout and design of the permanent tract access gates shall be approved by the
Community Development Department after review and approval by the Fire
Department.
73. This tract shall be annexed into the Rancho La Quinta Homeowners' Association (HOA)
ensuring maintenance of common open space, perimeter landscaping, private roads,
security, and architectural consistency pursuant to the requirements of Specific Plan
84-004.
A9Cond TT29283RanchLQ Original.wpd - Greg T-- Page 15 Of 15
44� 214
ATTACHMENTS
44U 215
City Council Minutes Attachment 1 February 15, 2000
4. CONSIDERATION OF A LETTER OF INTENT TO SEEK ANNEXATION FROM THE
VILLAGE AT THE PAZAND
LFI DENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED
WEST OF MONROE SSOU OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
Mayor Pena abstai edot tial conflict of interest and left the dais.
Community Developmr Her
presented a brief report as outlined
in the staff eport.
A brief"discussion ensin Council co666rred to mo forward with the
annexation process.
MOTION It was mouncil Members Perkins/Henderson to authorize
staff to begin the anncess for the property located at the southwest
corner of Madison Street and Airport Boulevar land to contact -.the properly
owners of the adjacent 76 acres to see if thAy wish -to be included in thle
annexation. Motion carried with Mayor Pena ABSENT. MINUTE ORDER NO.
2000-33.
5. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO WAIVE THE UNDER -GROUNDING OF
UTILITY LINES FOR RANCHO LA QUINTA.
Community Development Director Herman presented the report as outlined in
the staff report.
Council Member Adolph questioned who would pay for future undergrounding
costs and suggested the developer provide a bond.
Council Member Henderson felt the costs would most likely be paid by the local
property owners through an Assessment District or spread by IID to all their
customers.
After a brief discussion, Council concurred to grant the waiver.
MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Adolph to instruct the
applicant to prepare and submit the necessary amendments for the Rancho
La Quinta Specific Plan and Tract Maps (to waive the requirement for utility
undergrounding). Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 2000-34.
44;216
Attachment 3
Q
d
t
440
21§
® ® M ® M ® a ® 0 M M ® ■
PLAWLAND
Attachment 5
o � GITY �`p pARTMENT
PIANNIN�
f�
r .-r
EvckAl
�a
o,
d
,V
nF
°
ag
a
t�
a;a
T;,�
s
a
MEMONOMEWWWAMUNUM
-Nnnml
,:
V�Y�)
I 9
60N
CPBXZ 1�YY1 3.L1RLfl
F
R ��
v
34MVE 19TM1 3.V10431
�j
16
�
huh.
f r
_ _
_ _ S
.. a
—�.
A
�.ie
�
�f
--
��
""
a
�
k is
o
�
�
� � �.
3 ,. ,. ,. .... ...
..'. ._
--�
d��
,,. ..
., �.
..�
22
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 8, 2001
CASE NUMBER: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-704
APPLICANT: MR. PETE BILICKI
PROPERTY OWNER: ESTATES 18, L.L.C.
REQUEST: RESIDENTIAL TRACT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF TWO
SINGLE FAMILY PROTOTYPES WITH THREE AND TWO
FACADE TREATMENTS, RESPECTIVELY, AND LANDSCAPE
DESIGN PLANS
LOCATION: ALONG PENINSULA LANE WITHIN PGA WEST
(ATTACHMENT 1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE PROJECT IS WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 (PGA
WEST), FOR WHICH AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE # 83062922) WAS
CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON MAY 15, 1984
(RESOLUTION 84-28). NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES
OR CONDITIONS EXIST WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE
PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES
CODE SECTION 21166.
Tract 28522 was approved in June 1998 and subsequently recorded. The tract at the
time was established as a custom home subdivision. To date, no homes have been
proposed within this tract; therefore, the units under review are not subject to the
compatibility provisions of the Zoning Code.
The applicant requests approval for two prototypes of 4,621 and 4,675 square feet.
Prototype 1 provides two master suites along with an attached guest casita, library,
grand room, casual room, and a common billiard and game room. This plan allows an
option (4621-2) for separate bedroom and library spaces in lieu of the common game
CAW rkgrp\PCrpt\perptsdp704.wpd
5
and billiard room, with the library as an exercise room. Prototype 2 provides two
master suites along with a third bedroom and attached casita suite, as well as a grand
room and exercise room. Both plans feature a central courtyard and three -car garage.
Prototype 1 has three elevation schemes and Prototype 2 proposes two. Both plans
retain their basic architectural elements, featuring use of stone elements, varying
window and roof line treatments, entry porticos and other minor design variations.
No significant variation is evident between the right left and rear elevations of either
plan. The building architectural style and treatments evoke Mediterranean and
Spanish Hacienda influences, consisting of stucco, clay "S" roof tile, and stone
veneers. Exterior material color tones are in varying shades of brown, reddish -brown
and beige, arranged to accent the significant building elements. Building heights are
single story - 18' 6" for Prototype 1 and 18' 8" for Prototype 2, well under height
limits applicable to the PGA West and Weiskopf Specific Plans.
Proposed on -site landscaping for the site consists of the common areas along the
drive lane and the front yard areas for each lot. Currently, approximately 90% of the
common area landscaping is in place and viable. The plant palettes for the common
and front yard areas are based on several commonly used tree, shrub and flowering
plant species used in the original design. Proposed common area landscaping will
supplement and replace some of the existing landscaping work previously installed
for this tract during initial marketing of the lots as custom home sites.
ALRC Action - On May 2, 2001, the ALRC reviewed these two prototype architectural
plans. No issues were raised by the Committee, which unanimously recommended
approval of the site development permit by Minute Motion 2001-019 (Attachment 2)•
Residential Tract Development Review Req it m n - Each prototype plan and
elevation meets the standards as specified by Section 9.6O.33O.D of the Zoning
Code. The existing and proposed tract landscaping is consistent with the
requirements specified in Section 9.60.330.E, pertaining to enhanced design
treatments for vehicular tract entries.
As required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning
Ordinance, the following findings to approve Site Development Permit 2001-704 are
provided:
1 . The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the La Quinta General
Plan, as it proposes a single family home in an established residential tract
zoned and General Plan -designated for Low Density Residential development.
C:\Wrkgrp\PCrpt\perptsdp 704. wpd
4 ,5
2. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the La Quinta Zoning
Code, as it proposes single family homes in an established residential tract
zoned for RL (Low Density Residential) development.
3. The proposed Site Development Permit is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as the project is within Specific
Plan 83-002 (PGA West), for which an Environmental Impact Report (State
Clearinghouse # 83062922) was certified by the City Council.
4. The architectural design aspects of the proposed Site Development Permit
provide interest through varied roof element heights, enhanced building entries,
stone veneer wainscot and facade treatments, horizontal banding and other
design details which will be compatible with and not detrimental to surrounding
development in PGA West, and with the overall design quality prevalent in the
City.
5. The site design aspects of the proposed Site Development Permit will be
compatible with and not detrimental to surrounding development in PGA West,
and with the overall design quality prevalent in the City.
6. The project landscaping for the proposed Site Development Permit has been
designed to unify and enhance visual continuity of the proposed homes with
surrounding development. Landscape improvements are designed and sized to
provide visual appeal. The permanent overall site landscaping utilizes various
tree and shrub species to accentuate views into the building architecture. The
plant palette for common area landscaping will accent and be complementary
to the retention of existing landscaping improvements along the common areas.
Adopt Minute Motion No. 2001- , approving Site Development Permit 2001-704.
Attachments:
1 . Location Map
2. ALRC Minutes of May 2, 2001
3. 11 " x 17" Exhibits (Committee Members only)
Prepared by:
Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner
SpVmitted by: \\
Christine di lorio, P nning Manager
CAW rkgrp\PCrpt\perptsdp704. wpd
45r
52nd JAVENUE
= 53rd AVENUE
I
u+ 54th AVENUE
PGA BLVD.
Site
JACK NICKLAUS RMERA
PGA WEST
CASE Na
8
ATTACHMENT 1
L _DESCRIPT
A PORTION OF PARCEL 2 OF L.L.A. NO. 95-208
CASE MAP
Tentative Tract Map 28522
NORTH
SCALE: WrS
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
May 2, 2001
L TO ORDER
10:00 a.m.
A. \,This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Committee was called
t' order at 10:03 a.m. by Planning Manager Christine di lorio who led the
fla. salute.
B. Comm' tee Members present: Dennis Cunningham and Bill Bobbitt. It
was mo d and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt
to excuse ommittee Member Reynolds. Unanimously approved.
C. Staff present: lanning Manager Christine di lorio, Associate Planner
Wally Nesbit, an Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGE A: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Planning Manager Christine di lori asked if there were any changes to
the Minutes of April 18, 2001. There1qeing no corrections, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members bbitt/Cunningham to approve
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Site Development Permit 2001-704; a request of Mr. Peter Bilicki for
review of an 18 lot development of two prototypes with three and two
facade treatments, respectively, and landscape design plans located
along Peninsula Lane within PGA West.
1. Associate Planner Wally Nesbit presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Committee Member Cunningham stated he had no issues with the
project and that controls inside gated communities are adequate
to deal with new units. 45
G:,WPDOCS\AL.RC5-2-01.wpd 1 ATTACHMENT 2
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
May 2, 2001
3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had no objections to the
project.
4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion
2001-019 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-704 subject to conditions as recommended. Unanimously
approved.
Site Development Permit Zuuu-iui; a requesr or i rsv ua-UurrTra-/v,
Limited Partnership for review of architectural and landscape plans for
two new prototype residential units each with three facades located at
the northwest corner of Bellerive and Winged Foot within PGA West
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. Committee Member Cunningham asked staff to identify the
cation. Mr. Peter Bilicki noted on the plans the location.
C mittee Member Cunningham stated he had no issues with the
3. Comm ttee Member Bobbitt stated he had no questions or
objectto s to the project.
4. Mr. R. C. bbs asked for clarification as to when a compatibility
review was quired. Staff explained when a compatibility review
was required. Discussion followed regarding compatibility.
5. There being no fu her discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Membe Bobbitt/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion
2001-020, recomme ding approval of Site Development Permit
2001-701, subject to Ne conditions
C. Site Development Permit 2001-7 ; a request of La Quinta Kingdom Hall
of Jehovah Witnesses for review o landscaping and architectural plans
for a church on 2.39 acres on the east side of Dune Palms Road,
between Westward Ho Drive and the C achella Valley Storm Channel.
1 . Planning Consultant Nicole Criste sented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy f which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
G:\W PDOCS W LRC5-2-01. wpd 2
4 5 ��