5 Riv Cnty Board Staff Report 06-20-2000 re: SP 218, Amend 1 & ZC 6454 (1988)PINKS SUBMITTAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS all '►��
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA a Py
4
FROM: TLMA/Planning Department SUBMITTAL DATE: June 20, 2000
4+r; ►`s
SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN NO.218, AMENDMENT NO. 1/CHANGE OF ZONE CASE NO.
6454 - E. A. No. 37465 - Coral Mountain, LLC - Fourth Supervisorial District -
Lower Coachella Valley Zoning District - 1,280 acres - SP Zone - Northerly of
62"6 Street, southerly of 58" Street, easterly of Jefferson Street, and westerly of
v Jackson Street - PROJECT: Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment No.1
� proposes to change the name of the Specific Plan from "Rancho La Quinta" to
W "Coral Mountain" and to redesign the Specific Plan so as to: increase the total
acreage within site boundaries from 1,251 acres to 1,279 acres pursuant to a
u new property survey; reduce the total number of dwelling units from 4,262 to
I= 0 2,740; increase the number of dwelling units in the medium -high density
QCL ❑ category from 1,535 to 1,749; decrease the number of units in the medium
4 density category from 2,727 to 991; increase the number of golf courses from 2
to 3 and acreage in golf course use from 380 to 541; decrease commercial
acreage from 35 acres to 27 acres; delete 40 acres of parrs; and provide for 86
acres of rights -of -way and easements. Change of Zone Case No. 6454
proposes to redefine allowable uses and development standards in Planning
Areas 1 through 13 and add Planning Areas 14 through 53 to the 5peci#ic Plan
zoning ordinance. The property would continue to be zoned SP..'ry
1dti c•L �..-:
CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES: The main issues which arose during consideration of this project were
means of protecting prime agricultural land, the establishment of an appropriate buffer between
residential and agricultural land. disclosure to residents of proximity to agricultural land, and means of
providing for participation by local tribes in the archaeological mitigation process.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
The Planning Department recommended Approval; and,
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS BY UNANIMOUS VOT
Ale�JLence, AICP, Planning Director
AJL:JJJG (Continued on attached pages)
a
as C.E.O. RECOMMENDATION:
O
County LXeCUtiVe officer Signature
O
8
E
E
IS
E
c
m
0
AM11A Prev. Agn. ref.
Dist. 4th AGENDA K10
THE HONORABLE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
SP218A 1/CZ06454
Page -2-
CERTIFICATION OF THE ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO.232,
which has been cam feted in compliance with the State of California EIR Guidelines and the
Riverside County Rues to Implement CEQA; and,
APPROVAL of SPECIFIC PLAN NO.218, AMENDMENT NO. 1, subject to the attached
conditions of approval, and based on the findings and conclusions incorporated in the
attached Planning Commission resolution adopted on dune 21, 2000; and,
APPROVAL of CHANGE OF ZONE CASE NO.6454 amending the text of the SP Zone
ordinance for Specific Plan No. 218 through the addition of Planning Areas and the revision in
permitted uses and development standards of previously identified Planning Areas, based on
the findings and conclusions incorporated in the staff report dated May 24, 2000.
2
MINUTE ORDER: MAY 24, 2000
I. AGENDA ITEM 3.2: SPECIFIC PLAN No. 218, AMENDMENT NO. 1, CHANGE OF
ZONE NO.6454, and ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO.37465.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Specific Plan 218, Amendment No. 1 proposes to modify the
planned land uses within Specific Plan 218. The primary land use changes consist of a
decrease in the maximum number of residential units allowed within the specific plan from
4,262 to 2,740 with the following densities: 1,749 dwelling units on 336.5 acres of Medium
High Density Residential (5-8 dulac); 991 dwelling on 287.3 acres of Medium Density
Residential (2-5 dulac). Additionally, Specific Plan 218, Amendment No.1 would designate
eight planning areas for golf courses and appurtenant uses on 541.2 acres, 1.1 acres of
community facilities, and 26.9 acres of commercial uses. A table showing how this project
differs from the original specific plan is incorporated in this staff report. Specific Plan 218,
Amendment No. 1 would also change the name of the specific plan from "Rancho La
Quinta" to "Coral Mountain".
Change of Zone No. 6454 is a proposed textual change in the Specific Plan zoning ordinance
that would add Planning Areas 14 through 53 to the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance, and
would.redefine Planning Areas 1 through 13.
This project is generally located north of 62nd Street, easterly of Jefferson Street, and westerly
of Jackson Street.
III. MEETING SUMMARY:
The following staff presented the subject proposal:
Keith Gardner. Planning Department
Sian Roman, Transportation Department
The following spoke in favor to the subject proposal:
John Gamlin, Coral Mountain Development. LLC, 41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 111, Palm
Desert, 92211
The following spoke in a neutral position to the subject proposal:
Bob Hargreaves. Best, Best, & Krieger, 74-760 Highway 111, Indian Wells
Howard Keck, Brighton Distribution Company. 1.6210 Daily Drive, Van Nuys, 91406
John Criste, 400 S. Farrell Drive, B-205, Palm Springs, 92262
Fred Baker, City of La Quinta, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, 92253
IV. CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES:
MINUTE ORDER: MAY 24, 2000
AGENDA ITEM 3.2: Page 2
Protection of prime agricultural land; Buffers between agriculture and residential; Disclosure
statements to residents; Agreement with Indian tribe was not achieved - Resolved through
conditions of approval.
V. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning Commission, by a vote of 5-0, recommend to the Board of Supervisors:
CERTIFICATION of the Addendum to Environmental Impact ReportNo. 232, TENTATIVE
APPROVAL of Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment No, 1 (Coral Mountain, formerly
Rancho La Quinta), subject to the attached conditions of approval, and based upon the
findings and conclusions incorporated in the staff report; and, 'TENTATIVE APPROVAL
of Change of Zone No. 6454, as a textual change in the existing SP zoning ordinance.
VI. TAPES:
The entire discussion of this agenda item can be found on Tape Nos. IA and 113. For a copy
of thMapes, please contact Carole Myers, Planning Commission Secretary, at (909) 955-
3251.
l A.
MINUTE ORDER: APRIL 12, 2000
I. AGENDA ITEM 4.1: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 218, AMENDMENT NO. 1, CHANGE OF
ZONE NO.6454, and ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 37465.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Specific Plan 218, Amendment No. 1 proposes to modify the
planned land uses within Specific Plan 218. The primary land use changes consist of a
decrease in the maximum number of residential units allowed within the specific plan from
4,262 to 3,500 with the following densities: 397 dwelling units on 17 acres of Very High
Density Residential (12+ du/ac); 167 dwelling units on 19 acres of High Density Residential
(8-12 du/ac); 2,154 dwelling units on 428 acres of Medium High Density Residential (5-8
du/ac; 782 dwelling units on 274 acres of Medium Density Residential (2-5 du/ac).
Additionally, Specific Plan 218, Amendment No. 1 would designate two golf course
planning areas on 371 acres, 42 acres of parks and trails, 2 acres of community facilities, 9
acres of commercial uses, and a school site on 10 acres. A table showing how this project
differs from the original specific plan is incorporated in this staff report. Specific Plan 218,
Amendment No. I would also change the name of the specific plan from "Rancho La
Quinta" to "Coral Mountain."
Change of Zone No. 6454 is a proposed textual change in the Specific Plan zoning ordinance
that would add Planning Areas 14 to 46 to the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance and would
redefine Planning Areas 1 through 13. „
III. MEETING SUMMARY:
The following staff presented the subject proposal:
Keith Gardner. Planning Department
David Avila, Fire Department
Ed Studor, Transportation Department
Sian Roman. Transportation Department
The following appeared in favor to the subject proposal:
John Ganilin, Coral Mountain Development, LLC, 41865 Boardwalk, Suite lll. Palm
Desert. 92211
Richard Meyer. 79-310 Port Royal, Bermuda Dunes
Mary E. Cornell. 80821 Vista Lazo, La Quinta
The following appeared in a neutral position to the subject proposal:
Robert Hargredves, representing Howard Keck, 39700 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage
Howard Keck. Brighton Dist. Co.. c/o 39700 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage
IV. CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES:
MINUTE ORDER: APRIL 12, 2000
AGENDA ITEM 4.1: Page 2
Location of school site; Preservation of area; Density; Smell/odor from surrounding
agricultural properties - Unresolved.
V. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
The Planning Commission, by a vote of 4-0 (Commissioner Griffin was absent),
CONTINUED Specific Plan No, 218, Amendment No. 1, Change of Zone No. 6454; and.
Environmental Assessment No. 374155. to May 24, 2000, at 9:00 a-m.
VI. TAPES:
The entire discussion of this agenda item can be found on Tape Nos. 2A and 2B. For a copy
of the tapes, please contact Carole Myers, Planning Commission Secretary, at (909) 955-
3251.
MW
Zoning District: Lower Coachella
Supervisorial District: Fourth
E.A. Number: 37465
Regional Team No.: Riverside
Project Planner: Keith Gardner
Valley SPECIFIC PLAN NO.218A1
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 6454
Planning Commission: May 24, 2000
Continued from: April 12, 2000
Agenda Item No.: 3.2
Applicant: Coral Mountain Development, LLC
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPART
STAFF REPORT
ANT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION:
Specific Plan 218, Amendment No. 1 proposes to modify the planned land uses within Specific Plan
218.
The primary land use changes consist of a decrease in the maximum number of residential units allowed
within the specific plan from 4,262 to 2,740 with the following densities: 1,749 dwelling units on .336.5ed
acres of Medium High Density Residential (5-8 du/ac); 991 dwelling units on 287.3 acres of Medium
Density Residential (2-5 du/ac). Additionally, Specific Plan 218, Amendment No 1 would designate
eight
planning areas for golf courses and appurtenant uses on 541.2 acres, 1.1 acres of coorimmunity facilities, and
26.9 acres of corxlmercial uses. A table showing ,and
incorporated in this staff report. Specific Plan 218, Amendment Noproject f le would alrs from so
cha"ng I specific plan is
specific plan from "Rancho La Quinta" to "Coral Mountain."
so change the name of the
Change of Zone No. 6454 is a proposed textual change in the Specific Plan zoning ordinance that would
add Planning Areas 14 through 53 to the Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance, and would redefine Plannl
Areas 1 through 13. g
This project is generally located north of 62"d Street, easterly of Jefferson Street and westerlyof Jacks
Street.
on
FURTHER PLANNI�IC CONSIDER-.ATIONS:
This project was originally heard by the Planning Commission on April 12, 2000. At that hearing,the
Planning Commission raised several issues that it wanted addressed by the time of the Ma 24 2000
Planning Commission date. Those issues that were raised include: Y '
1) Compatibility of high density residential uses in close proximity to existing agricultural uses.
2) The location of the school site.
3) Mitigation for archaeological and historical resources.
4) The amount of commercial area within this Specific Plan.
Since the last planning Commission hearing, the project has been redesigned to incorporate the following
hanges: the Very High Density Residential planning area has been eliminated; the school site and park site
have been eliminated; the amount of golf course acreage has increased from 36 holes ❑fgolf on 371 acres
to 45 holes of golf on 541 acres; the amount of commercial acreage has increased from 9 acres to 27 acres,
PC STAFF REPORT: MAY 24, 2000
SPECIFIC PLAN NO.218AI
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 6454
PAGE 2 OF 6
and the amount of community facilities acreage has decreased from 2 acres to 1.
Staff feels that the issues raised at the last Planning Commission hearing have been mitigated in the ' following ways:
1) The elimination of the Very High Density Residential designation mitigates the concern of high
density residential uses in close proximity to agricultural uses.
2) The proposed number of dwelling units has decreased by almost 800 and the school site has been
eliminated.
3) The archaeological concern is proposed to be mitigated by the addition of two conditions of
approval to the project (30.PLANNING.30 and 30.PLANNING.31) stating that the applicant is to
provide to the Planning Department a pre -grading mitigation/monitoring proposal and a post -grading
mitigation report. The intent of these conditions would be that no grading permits or building
permits would be issued by the County of Riverside unless the mitigation measures as proposed by
the archaeological report associated with this Specific Plan are substantially complied with.
4) The amount of commercial acreage within this Specific PIan has increased, thereby satisfying the
need for more commercial uses in the area.
SUMNIARY OF FINDINGS:
5. Existing Land Use (Exh. #1): Vacant land
6. Surrounding Land Use (Exh. #1): Single-family residences, golf course, groves,
vacant land
7. Existing Zoning (Exh. #2): Sp
8. Surrounding Zoning (Exh. #2): A-1-20, A-1-10, W-2, R-A-2, City of La Quinta
9. Comprehensive General Plan (Exh. #5): Open Space and Conservatipu Map: Adopted
Specific Plan
Community Plan: Eastern Coachella Valley Plan
(ECVP)
ECVP Land Use: SP 218 (2A, C, Park)
6. Land Data: Total Acreage: 1,280
Total Residential Acreage: 623.8
Total Commercial Acreage: 26.9
Total Golf Course Uses Acreage: 541.2
Total "Other" Acreage: 1.1
)7. Environmental Concerns: See attached environmental assessment and the
Addendum to EIR No. 232.
PC STAFF REPORT: MAY 24, 2000
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 218A1
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 6454
PAGE 3 OF 6
RECOMMENDATIONS:
CERTIFICATION of THE ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO.232,
which has been completed in compliance with the EIR Guidelines and the Riverside County Rules to
Implement CEQA; and,
TENTATIVE APPROVAL of SPECIFIC PLAN 218, AMENDMENT NO. I (CORAL MOUNTAIN,
formerly RANCHO LA QUINTA), subject to the attached conditions of approval, and based upon the
findings and conclusions incorporated in the staff report; and,
TENTATIVE APPROVAL of CHANGE OF ZONE NO.6454, as a textual change in the existing SP
zoning ordinance.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The proposed project is in conformance with the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan.
2. The project as proposed is consistent with the applicable zoning classification of Ordinance No.
348, and all other applicable provisions of Ordinance No. 348.
3. As proposed, the project is designed to protect public health, safety and general welfare.
4. Since this project is a revision of a previously approved specific plan, it is compatible with the
present and future logical development of the area.
5. The proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. However, mitigation.
measures introduced in the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 232 have been
deemed as adequate by Riverside County Planning Staff to minimize the -potential environmental
impacts.
FINDINGS: The following findings are in addition to those incorporated in the summary of findings and
the attached environmental assessment, which is incorporated herein by reference.
The project site is designated SP 218 (Specific Plan No. 218) on the Eastern Coachella Valley
Plan (ECVP) Land Use Allocation Map.
2. The zoning for the subject site is SP.
3. The project site is surrounded by property which is zoned A-1-20 (Light Agriculture 20-acre
minimum) to the north and northeast, A-1-10 (Light Agriculture 10-acre minimum) to the east and
south, and W-2 (Controlled Development Areas) and R-A-2'/z (Residential -Agricultural 2'/z acre
minimum) to the southwest.
PC STAFF REPORT: MAY 24, 2000
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 218A1
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 6454
PAGE 4OF6
4. Single-family residences, golf course, groves, and vacant land are located in the project vicinity.
5. On October 6, 1988, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors certified the adequacy and
completeness of Final EIR No. 232 in connection with its approval of Specific Plan No. 218.
6. The Riverside County Planning Staff has determined that an Addendum Environmental Impact
report is required and appropriate under Public Resources Code § 21166, and that an Addendum
to Final EIR No. 232 is sufficient to make that EIR apply to Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan
No. 218.
7. The -Riverside County Transportation Department has reviewed Comprehensive General Plan
Amendment 493 which proposes that the General Plan designation for Madison Street between
58`h and W4 Streets be downgraded from an Urban Arterial Highway to an Arterial Highway and
is recommending approval of that application.
INFOILNIATIONAL ITEMS:
1. As of this writing, the following letters have been received by the Planning Department in
support
of the project, and have been incorporated into the staff report:
a.
Desert Contractor's Association
dated March 17, 2000
b.
Kleine Building and Development, Inc.
dated March 22, 2000
c..
Arthur M. Kazarian
dated March 27, 2000
d.
Mohamad Reza Ghods
dated March 24, 2000
e.
James Franco Construction
dated March 31, 2000
f.
Mark A. Couch, Sr.
dated March 31, 2000
g-
Tidwell Concrete Construction
dated April 3, 2000
h.
Eileen M. Sheehy
dated April 4, 2000
i.
Archuleta Concrete Construction Co.
dated April 4, 2000`' -
j.
Marty Vistica
dated April 5, 2000
k.
Al Bankus
dated April 7, 2000
1.
Venus Ranches, Inc.
dated April 10, 2000
2. The project site is not located within:
a. an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault hazard study zone.
b. a General Plan high fire hazard area.
C. a General Plan blowsand area.
d. a 100 year flood plain.
3. The project site is partially located within:
a. the City of La Quinta sphere of influence.
4. The project is wholly located within:
a. Coachella Valley Unified School District.
PC STAFF REPORT: MAY 24, 2000
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 218A1
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 6454
PAGE 5OF6
b. Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District.
5. The following documents have been sent to County Counsel for review and approval and are
incorporated in this staff report, but as of this writing, they have not been approved:
a. Specific Plan Amendment resolution.
b. Proposed Specific Plan zoning ordinance text.
6. Staff has received letters from the following governmental agencies that have raised issues with
this project. These concerns are proposed to be mitigated through the conditions of approval:
a. Riverside County Waste Management Dept. December 31, 1998
b. City of La Quinta January 19, 1999
C. Coachella Valley Unified School District January 19, 1999
d. Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District February 9, 1999
e. Coachella Valley Water District June 14, 1999
f. Riverside County Regional Park and Open Space District November 2, 1999
INTEGRATED LANNING PROJECT RELATIONSHIP:
Riverside County is currently preparing a new General Plan for the entire County. This plan is being jointly
developed and coordinated as the Integrated Planning Project. This project was begun in Spring 1999, and
is expected to take three years to complete, including all necessary environmental documentation and
regulatory approvals at the local, state, and federal levels. During the first year, the County and RCTC
sought broad public input to establish an overall vision for the County's future, and gathered .much of the
data needed to prepare the plans. During the second year, which we are now entering, the draft plans are
being prepared, public feedback will be sought, and environmental reports will be prepared and circulated
for public and agency reviews. The third and final year will be earmarked for'public hearings and the final_,
steps in the approval process.
During the remaining two -year period that the new plans are under preparation, the potential effectiveness
and benefits of the concepts that are being developed through them could be reduced by ongoing, piecemeal
approvals of individual land development applications, which are not at this time required to be compatible,
with the emerging Integrated Planning Project concepts. The County has determined that the development '
review process would be well smed by ensuring that all parties involved in it - developers, citizens,
PIanning Commissioners. etc. - are aware of the Integrated PIannina Project proposals now, so that they can
identify and discuss, as appropriate, any opportunities that are available to improve the overall quality of
land use planning in the County. Accordingly, on April 18. 2000, the Board of Supervisors approved an
Interim (K--hile the Integrated Planning Project is under preparation) Project Information Distribution policy
which, among other actions, requires that County staff provide the Planning Commission with an analysis
of how proposed General Plan Amendments and Specific Plans and amendments to them relate to currently
,roposed Integrated Planning Project products. The discussion below is provided in accordance with the
intent of this policy.
PC STAFF REPORT: MAY 24, 2000
SPECIFIC PLAN NO.218AI
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 6454
PAGE 6 OF 6
The existing land use types and mixture approved for Specific Plan No. 218 have been recognized by the
proposed mapped Vision associated with the new General PIan. Since proposed Amendment No. 1 would
improve the balance of land uses within SP No. 218 and improve SP 218's compatibility with adjacent uses,
it is compatible with the new General Plan at this early stage of its development.
Y:\TM2\Keith\SPs\spOO218alpc2.wpd
SF iC
oil"
Im
N"
�"
Do -An
5530 E-7
04/04/00
CC
Bros P4.
Dn.n
B%
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY PLANNING
DEPARTMENT
Coral Mountain
Land Use Summary
Table II-2
,Land Use
Plennln Area
Aerns
rarpt Density
Max DL/'e
Medium Dansq
2
13.2
3.0
40
Residential (2-5 DUTAQ
3
4.4
3.0
14
8.050 sf Lob
4
16.2
3.0
41
5
27.9
3.0
70
6
21.3
3.0
52
6
9.2
3.0
28
9
7.6
3.0
23
10
12.7
3.0
32
12
".6
5.0
227
14
1.$
5.0
12
is
11.7
5.0
so
16
2.1
Ca
11
17
5.6
S.0
30
Is
8.2
5.0
41
22
3.8
5.0
20,
51
97.0
3.0
291
3u1no1al
287.3
Sol
Medium Mph Density
23
21.2
5.0
106
Residential (" DU/AQ
24
17.6
5.0
104
6.00 sf Lou
25
21.7
5.0
106
26
23
5.0
13
27
8.8
5.0
44
28
4.2
5.0
21
29
10.5
5.0
52:
31
15.9
5.0
so
32
s.5
5.0
32
34
S.s
6.0
35
35
3.3
5.0
17
36
4.4
5.0
22
37
5.2
5.0
41
36
7.5
6.0
45
39
7.1
5.0
35
40
8.1
S.0
41
41
7.3
5.0
36
42
SA
5.0
27
43
12.5
so
62
44
7.7
5.0
39
45
30.5
6.5,
168
46
5.4
6.0
32
47
5.6
S.a = _
28
49
34.0
S.5
187
53
74.9
6.0
374
Subtotal
336.6
1749
GoM Coupe / Ciuh
1
2.0
House / IMaintenarce
7
5.111
11
194.3
13
10.0
19
123.3
30
6.2
46
4.3
s0
195.7
5 u mote I
"1.2
Commendal
21
3.1
33
13.8
52
10.0
Subtotal
29.2
commuwy Facilities
20
1.1
R O.W. /Easements
n�
86.3
���_• •��•• 7412.4 1 2740
Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment No. 1 II-5
Coral Mountain
u
Summary Of Changes
Original SP
Rancho La Quinta
LAND USE DUs
AC
Commercial
35
Very High Residential 12+
High Residential 8-12
Medium High Res. 5-8 1,535
183
Medium Res. 2-5 2,727
612
Golf Courses (2)
380
Parks
40
Community Facilities
1
TOTAL 1 4,2621 1.251
Previous Draft
'An accurate survey of the propem• shoes the actual acreage to be 29 acres larger
than the area identified by Assessor's Parcels. The new survey corrects a
measurement error ofapproximately 2%.
Current Draft
LPALM
r 7F4fA1 iMr tt
�. �1g{TR
DUN CLVOJ
11[1L7a_.I�ll��.
�.;; .:,.y-,�y=r "• �� Regional Man
}. := t�•, ��• : r;,oA- i figure 1
- `^{ •'.- • ' - ,!',; j iv -tom• - r..- _ Y —4- n y�rt: : ii"•� 7rlER'5r !. r �" `' •�.;•i' •;'� E� }. "'' : ti.:�• . _
CLUD
10,
LA
.':� .-r• ! ��� ..1 ... ��� � del. Y'Y• ! nip
t+ • 3r`ti' ar isJ • f toJ+��''�� �t !� :7C•
•Ir�
.�dlxtr f. �'i� �1Y VL�. ,`� ..� _ .C.� _ �. ! f ••
�s}�. �* = � . �.: �,tiP TvRr • •t; �r , i �_: �. ;;:..... _ � �,� • •+ caecl+i��:b
TM
CA
RtV
LA RUIMA
To M3
54TEAV S4
'i �A �C a�i.i.r4� ti~: �T,. �t`:-.YsC �C� CfJdC31ECL� :t'
��lt�y '.ir:y,}r•�;i•�#L'�..'•.�t.' � � � I • - R+vF.�,•SIAC I �, _' •� • .
AM
THE Q%qpkgfAT LA RUM
ML
AV% Mr
se
L'•'s + LA QQV A f
Op wwti&kit
41
Cry W� CAHLALiI>'' 'Pro'
ra t
,1
KOHL NN.
RAMCH t l
Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment No. 1 3A�'-
Vicinity Map
Figure 2
140
vE�vuE ap
wa®.
r }
m TORRES IMART INE
r
— ................. _ _. -- J 2
Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment No. 1
1
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 1
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SPECIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1
10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
EVERY DEPARTMENT
10. EVERY. 1
SP - HOLD HARMLESS
Parcel: 761-230-009
The applicant or any successor -in -interest shall defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the County of Riverside
(COUNTY), its agents, officers, or employees from any
claim, action, or proceeding against the COUNTY, its
agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void
or annul an approval of the COUNTY, its advisory agencies,
appeal boards, or legislative body concerning the SPECIFIC
PLAN. The COUNTY will promptly notify the subdivider of
any such claim, action, or proceeding against the COUNTY
and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the COUNTY
fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim,
action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the
defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the
COUNTY.
10. EVERY. 2
SP - SP PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Specific Plan No. 218A1 shall consist of the following:
a. Exhibit "A": Specific Plan Text.
b. Exhibit "B": Specific Plan Conditions of Approval.
c. Exhibit "C": Mitigation Reporting/Monitoring Program.
If any specific plan conditions of approval differ from the
specific plan text or exhibits, the specific plan
conditions of approval shall take precedence.
10. EVERY. 3
SP - DEFINITIONS
The words identified in the following list that appear in
all capitals in the attached conditions of Specific Plan
No. 218A1 shall be henceforth defined as follows:
SPECIFIC PLAN = Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment No. 1.
CHANGE OF ZONE = Change of Zone No. 6454.
10. EVERY. 4 SP - ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS
The development of the property shall be in accordance with
the mandatory requirements of all Riverside County
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 2
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SrECIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1 Parcel: 761-230-009
10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
10. EVERY. 4 SP - ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS (cont.) INEFFECT
ordinances including Ordinance Nos. 348 and 460 and state
laws; and shall conform substantially with the adopted
SPECIFIC PLAN as filed in the office of the Riverside
County Planning Department, unless otherwise amended.
10. EVERY. 5 SP - LIMITS OF SP DOCUMENT INEFFECT
No portion of the SPECIFIC PLAN which purports or proposes
to change, waive or modify any ordinance or other legal
requirement for the development shall be considered to be
part of the adopted specific plan.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
10.FIRE. 1 SP-#56-IMPACT MITIGATION INEFFECT
The project proponents shall participate in the fire
protection impact mitigation program as adopted by the
Riverside County Board of Supervisors.
10.FIRE. 2 SP-#87-OFF-SET FUNDING INEFFECT
The fiscal analysis for this project should identify a
funding source to off -set the shortage between the existing
county structure fire tax and the needed annual operation
and maintenance budget equal to approximately $400.00 per
dwelling unit and 25c per square foot for retail,
commercial and industrial.
10.FIRE. 4 SP-#71-ADVERSE IMPACTS INEFFECT
The proposed project will have a cumulative adverse impact
on the Fire Department's ability to provide an acceptable
level of service. These impacts include an increased
number of emergency and public service calls due to the
increased presence of structures and population. A portion
of these impacts can be mitigated by developer
participation in the fire mitigation program in the fire
mitigation program which would provide funding for one-time
capitol improvements such as land and equipment purchases
and building construction. Costs necessary to maintain the
increased level of service can be paartially off -set by
the additional county structure tax accured and would
require an increase in the Fire Department's annual
operating budget.
t
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 3
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S_-CIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1
10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
Parcel: 761-230-009
10.FIRE. 4 SP-#71-ADVERSE IMPACTS (cont.)
Therefore the Riverside County Fire Department recommends
approval of the specific plan subject to the following
conditions and/or mitigations:
10.FIRE. 5
SP-#86-WATER MAINS
All water mains and fire hydrants providing required fire
flows shall be constructed in accordance with the
appropriate sections of Riverside County Ordinance 460
and/or No.787, subject to the approval by the Riverside
County Fire Department.
10.FIRE. 6
SP-#96-ROOFING MATERIAL
All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant
roofing material as described in section 1503 of the
Uniform Building Code. Any wood shingles or shakes shall
have a Class B rating and shall be approved by the.Fire
Department prior to installation.
10.FIRE. 7
SP-#97-OPEN SPACE
The Homeowner's Association or appropriate community
service district shall be responsible for the maintenance
of the open space areas. Prior to approval of any
development plan for lands adjacent to open space areas, a
fire protection/vegetation management plan shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval.
10.FIRE. 8
SP-#85-FINAL FIRE REQUIRE
Final fire protection requirements and impact mitigation
measures will be determined when specific project plans are
submitted.
10.FIRE. 9
SP*-#100-FIRE STATION
Based on national fire standards, one new fire station
and/or engine company could be required for every 2,000 new
dwelling units, or 3.5 million square feet of
commercial/industrial occupancy. Given the project's
proposed development plan, 1 fire station may be needed to
meet anticipated service demands, given project densities.
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
a
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Sr,;XIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1 Parcel: 761-230-009
10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
10.PLANNING. 1 SP - REQUIRED FOR AMENDMENTS
Any amendment to the SPECIFIC PLAN, even though it may
affect only one portion of the specific plan, shall be
accompanied by a complete specific plan document, in both
paper and electronic formats, which includes the entire
specific plan, including both changed and unchanged parts.
10.PLANNING. 2 SP - MAINTAIN AREAS & PHASES
All planning area and phase numbers shall be maintained
throughout the life of the SPECIFIC PLAN, unless changed
through the approval of a specific plan amendment
accompanied by a revision to the complete specific plan
document.
10.PLANNING. 3 SP - NON -IMPLEMENTING MAPS
A land division filed for the purposes of phasing or
financing shall not be considered an implementing
development application for the purposes of the Planning
Department's conditions of approval.
10.PLANNING. 5 SP - 90 DAYS TO PROTEST
The project applicant has 90 days from the date of approval
of these conditions to protest, in accordance with the
procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020, the
imposition of any and all fees, dedications, reservations
and/or other exactions imposed on this project as a result
of the approval or conditional approval of this
project.
10.PLANNING. 6 SP - RECYCLING PROGRAM
All implementing development proposals shall be reviewed by
the Riverside County Waste Management Department for
compliance with Riverside County recycling requirements.
10.PLANNING. 7 SP - NO P.A. DENSITY TRANSFERS
Density transfers between Planning Areas within the
SPECIFIC PLAN shall not be permitted, except through the
Specific Plan Amendment process.
Page: 4
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 5
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Sl-,:sCIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1
10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
TRANS DEPARTMENT
10.TRANS. 1
SP - SP/TS CONDITIONS
Parcel: 761-230-009
The Transportation Department has reviewed the traffic
study submitted by Endo Engineering for the referenced
project. The study has been prepared in accordance with
accepted traffic engineering standards and practices,
utilizing County -approved guidelines. We generally concur
with the findings relative to traffic impacts.
The study indicates that it is possible to achieve a Level
of Service "C" for the following intersections (some of
which will require additional construction for mitigation
at the time of development):
Jefferson Street (NS)/Avenue 50 (EW)
Jefferson Street (NS)/Avenue 52 (EW)
Jefferson Street (NS)/Avenue 54 (EW)
Madison Street (NS)/Avenue 50 (EW)
Madison Street (NS)/Avenue 52 (EW)
Madison Street (NS)/Avenue 54 (EW)
Madison Street (NS)/Airport Boulevard (EW)
Madison Street (NS)/Avenue 58 (EW)
Madison Street (NS)/Resort Village Access (EW)
Madison Street (NS)/Avenue 60 (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/Avenue 50 (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/Avenue 52 (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/Avenue 54 (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/Airport Boulevard (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/Avenue 58 (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/Avenue 60 (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/North Primary Housing Access (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/South Primary Housing Access (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/Active Adult Village Access (EW)
Monroe Street (NS)/Avenue 62 (EW)
Active Adult Village Access (NS)/Avenue 60 (EW)
The Comprehensive General Plan circulation policies require
a minimum of Level of Service "C". As such, the proposed
project is consistent with this General Plan policy.
The associated conditions of approval incorporate
mitigation measures identified in the traffic study which
are necessary to achieve or maintain the required level of
service.
INEFFECT
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 6
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Src;CIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1 Parcel: 761-230-009
10. GENERAL CONDITIONS
10.TRANS. 2 SP - SP/TUMF INEFFECT
The proposed project is within the boundaries of the
Coachella Valley Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
District. Prior to the issuance of any building permits,
the project proponent shall pay the mitigation fees in
effect at the time building permits are issued.
10.TRANS. 3 SP - SP/WARRANTED T SIGNLS INEFFECT
The project is responsible for the following traffic
signals when warranted through subsequent traffic studies
done for development applicants within the boundaries of
the Specific Plan:
Madison Street/Avenue 58
Madison Street/Country Club Village Access
Madison Street/Avenue 60
Active Adult Village/Avenue 60
Monroe Street/ Avenue 58
Monroe Street/ Avenue 60
Monroe Street/North Primary Housing Village Access
10.TRANS. 5 SP - TRAFFIC SIGNAL MIT FEE INEFFECT
In accordance with Riverside County Ordinance No. 748, this
project shall be responsible for Traffic Signal Mitigation
Program fees in effect at the time of final inspection.
20. PRIOR TO A CERTAIN DATE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
20.PLANNING. 1 SP - SUBMIT FINAL SP DOCUMENT INEFFECT
Within sixty (60) days of the adoption of the final Board
of Supervisors resolution, or prior to the submittal of any
applications or the issuance of any permits, whichever
comes first, twelve (12) copies of the final specific plan
document shall be submitted to the Planning Department for
distribution. The documents shall include the final Board
of Supervisors resolution, the final specific plan
conditions of approval and zoning ordinance, all changes
required by these conditions of approval or made during the
public hearings on the project, if any, and the Final EIR
including the Addendum to EIR 232 and the Mitigation
Monitoring Program. A detailed list of required items and
their order can be obtained from the Planning Department.
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 7
15t32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SPECIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1
20. PRIOR TO A CERTAIN DATE
Parcel: 761-230-009
20.PLANNING. 2 SP - DURATION OF SP VALIDITY
The SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT shall remain valid for
twenty (20) years from date of approval of the amendment.
Should the entire project not be substantially built out
in that period of time, the project proponent shall file an
application for a specific plan amendment to extend the
maximum life of the specific plan. For the purpose of this
condition of approval, substantial buildout shall be
defined as the issuance of the 2,200th building permit.
The specific plan amendment will update the entire
specific plan document to reflect current development
requirements. Should this time period lapse without
substantial build out or without the approval of an
amendment extending this time period, the SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT shall become null and void twenty years from the
date of the adoption of the Board of Supervisors resolution
for this amendment.
0. PRIOR TO ANY PROJECT APPROVAL
W
PARKS DEPARTMENT
30.PARKS. 1
SP - REGIONAL TRAILS
In conjunction with the development of each individual
planning area, the implementing projects must include the
requirement for the dedication of trail easements and the
construction of regional trails. These easements shall be
located outside the road right-of-way.
The following regional trail segments must be dedicated and
constructed:
Along the northern boundry of the project, which is also
58th Avenue, from Madison Street west to the project
boundry.
Along the east side of Madison Avenue from 58th Avenue,
south to the point south of 60th Avenue where the property
boundry turns east from Madison Avenue and then along this
northwest/southeast diagonal to the corner where the
property boundry turns due east.
Along the south side of 60th Avenue from Madison Street to
the southeastern corner of Planning Area 44, Park.
If the applicant chooses, in lieu of constructing any or
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 8
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SrLCIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1 Parcel: 761-230-009
30. PRIOR TO ANY PROJECT APPROVAL
30.PARKS. 1 SP - REGIONAL TRAILS (cont.) INEFFECT
all the required regional trails, the applicant may deposit
with the District a sum which will allow the District to
contruct the trail. Please consult with the District as to
the current cost of trail construction.
The District will not accept a bond in lieu of fees.
Whether the applicant pays fees or builds trails, the
dedication of the trail easement is still required.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
30.PLANNING. 1 SP - COMPLETE CASE APPROVALS INEFFECT
Prior to approval of any tentative subdivision or parcel
map or approval of any plot plan or use permit, the
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, the COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, and the CHANGE OF ZONE shall be approved by the
Board of Supervisors and shall be effective.
30.PLANNING. 2 SP - STANDARDS FOR MAPS INEFFECT
Prior to the approval of any subdivision, all lots created
by land divisions within the SPECIFIC PLAN and the
following Planning Areas, shall be designed and conditioned
to have minimum lot sizes as follows:
a. All lots within Planning Areas 2-6, 8-10, 12,
14-18, 22, and 51 shall have a minimum lot size of 6,050
square feet.
b. All lots within Planning Areas 23-29, 31, 32,
34-47, 49, and 53 shall have a minimum lot size of 5,000
square feet.
30.PLANNING. 9 SP - RIGHT -TO -FARM NOTICE INEFFECT
In addition required by Ordinance no. 625 (Riverside County
Right -to -Farm Ordinance), the following text shall be
incorporated into a "Local Option, Real Estate Transfer
Disclosure Statement", pursuant to Civil Code 1102.6a to
all prospective buyers of residential property within the
Active Adult Village portion (Planning Areas 32, 33, 34,
35, or 36) of Specific Plan 218:
"Buyers of homes within this subdivision acknowledge and
agree that the property they are buying is located in
proximity to land zoned and currently used for agricultural
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 9
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SL.CIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1
30. PRIOR TO ANY PROJECT APPROVAL
Parcel: 761-230-009
30.PLANNING. 9 SP - RIGHT -TO -FARM NOTICE (cont.)
operations (the "Agricultural Operations"). It is the
policy of the State of California and the County of
Riverside that no agricultural activity, operation, or
facility, or apputenances thereof, conducted or maintained
for commercial purposes, and in a lawful manner consistent
with proper and accepted customs and standards, as
established by similar agricultural operations in the same
locality, shall be or become a nuisance, private or public,
due to any changed condition in or about the locality,
after it has been in operation for more than three years if
it was not a nuisance at the time it began. The phrase
'agricultural activity, operation, or facility,. or
appurtenance thereof' includes, but is not limited to the
cultivation and tillage of soil, the production,
cultivation; -growing, and harvesting of any agricultural
commodity, including timber, viticulture, apiculture,
horticulture,'the raising of livestock, fur bearing
animals, fish or poultry, and any practices performed by a..
farmer or on a farm as incident to or in conjunction with
such farming operations, including preparation for market,
delivery to storage or to market, or to carriers for
transportation to market."
"The Agricultural Operations which typically occur during
the day, but which may occur at night include the use of
heavy machinery which may generate noise and dust.
Applicaitons of agricultural chemicals that are applied
within state and local permi requirements may have
noticeable odors associated with their application.
Organic fertilizers may be employed that generate their own
objectionable odors. When and if frost and/or freezing
conditions occur, helicoptors may be employed at low
altitudes to stir up the air and prevent freezing. Workers
traveling to and from agricultural property to engage in
work may generate additional traffic and noise on public
streets in the vicinity."
"Seller has no control over the Agricultural Operations,
including its hours of operation or any potential changes
in those hours of operation. Buyer is purchasing the
Property with knowlede of the existance of the Agricultural
Operations. Buyer is also aware that this Notification and
consent may limit Buyer's rights to object int he future to
the continuance of the Agricultural Operations and/or the
manner of such operations as conducted in a lawful manner
consistent with proper and accepted customs and standards."
INEFFECT
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 10
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S�-r;CIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1
30. PRIOR TO ANY PROJECT APPROVAL
30.PLANNING. 10 SP - EA REQUIRED
Parcel: 761-230-009
An environmental assessment shall be conducted to determine
potential environmental impacts resulting from each tract,
change of zone, plot plan, specific plan amendment, or any
other discretionary permit required to implement the
SPECIFIC PLAN, unless said proposal is determined to be
exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act. The environmental assessments
shall be prepared as part of the review process for these
implementing projects. At a minimum, the environmental
assessment shall utilize the evaluation of impacts
addressed in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for
the SPECIFIC PLAN.
30.PLANNING. 11
SP - SPECIAL STUDIES REQUIRED
The following special studies/reports shall accompany
implementing development applications in the planning areas.
listed below:
Study / Report
a. Hazardous Waste Investigation Study
b. Detailed Preliminary Grading
c. Slope Stability Plan
d. Liquefaction
e. Archaeological Survey
f. Biological Survey
Planning Area
none
All planning Areas
23
All
All
None
g. Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan
h. Wetlands Study
i. Acoustical Study
None
none
2, 9, 12, 22,
23-25, 45, 49,
51, and 53
j. Other (as determined by subsequent All Planning Areas
environmental assessments)
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 11
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SLLCIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1 Parcel: 761-230-009
30. PRIOR TO ANY PROJECT APPROVAL
30.PLANNING. 12 SP - MITIGATION MONITORING
EXHIBIT C
MITIGATION MONITORING
An amendment to the California Environmental Quality Act
("CEQA"), codified as Public Resources Code Section
21081.6, required the preparation of a program to ensure
that all mitigation measures are fully and completely
implemented. The Addendum to the Environmental Impact
Report prepared for the SPECIFIC PLAN imposes certain
mitigation measures on the project. Certain conditions of
approval for the SPECIFIC PLAN constitute self contained
reporting / monitoring programs for certain mitigation
measures. At the time of approval of subsequent
development applications, further environmental reporting
/ monitoring programs will be established to ensure that
all mitigation measures are appropriately implemented.
30.PLANNING. 16 SP - MEET PHASE CONDITIONS
Prior to the approval of any implementing land division or
development application, a condition shall be placed on
that project requiring that, prior to the issuance of
the first building permit for the construction of any use
contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first
obtain clearance from the Riverside County Planning
Department that all pertinent conditions of approval have
been satisfied for the specific plan for the phase of
development in question.
30.PLANNING. 17 SP - PLANNING AREA LEGAL
Prior to the approval of any land division or development
permit (use permit, plot plan, etc.) within the SPECIFIC
PLAN, a condition of approval shall be applied requiring
that, prior to the recordation of any final map or issuance
of any building permit within a Planning Area of said
specific plan, the first applicant, or their
successor -in -interest, for a final map or building permit
within each Planning Area shall submit to the Planning
Department correct legal descriptions for the Planning
Area(s) within which the proposed project is located.
30.PLANNING. 18 SP - SCHOOL MITIGATION
Prior to the approval of any implementing land division or
development permit (use permit, plot plan, etc.), a
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 12
15:32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SrECIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1
30. PRIOR TO ANY PROJECT APPROVAL
Parcel: 761-230-009
30.PLAN'NING. 18 SP - SCHOOL MITIGATION (cont.)
condition of approval shall be applied to said implementing
development requiring that impacts to the Coachella Valley
Unified School District will be mitigated in accordance
with California State law.
30.PLANNING. 29 SP - QUARTERLY SP ACTIVITY RPT
Prior to the approval of any land division or development
permit (use permit, plot plan, etc.) within the SPECIFIC
PLAN, the following condition shall be applied to the land
division or development permit to read as follows:
The master developer, and any subsequent developer, shall
submit quarterly activity reports to the Planning
Department beginning with the ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST
BUILDING PERMIT. The report shall list all issued grading
permits, building permits, and final inspections and
occupancy permits, and tract and lot numbers; and shall
include monthly subtotals and cumulative Specific Plan
project totals. ALL PERMIT ISSUANCE SHALL CEASE IF
REPORTS ARE NOT SUBMITTED ON THE FIRST OF MARCH, JUNE,
SEPTEMBER, AND DECEMBER OF EVERY YEAR UNTIL THE ENTIRE
SPECIFIC PLAN IS COMPLETELY BUILT OUT.
30.PLANNING. 30 SP - Archeological Monitoring
Prior to the approval of any and each land division or
development permit (use permit, plot plan, etc.), a
condition shall be applied to the implementing project
stating that:
"Monitoring of mitigation measures related to excavation
and possible preservation of archeological resources shall
occur prior to site grading activities through an agreement
with a qualified archeologist. The project proponent shall
provide to the Planning Department a copy of the agreement.
The agreement shall include, but not be limited to, the
mitigation and monitoring procedures to be implemented
during the course of grading. The mitigation measures
shall include, but not be limited to: surface
collection, recordation of petroglyphs, cataloguing of
artifacts, recordation of features, and
Torres -Martinez tribe consultation. The Planning
Department shall not issue grading permits unless the
proposed mitigation and monitoring procedures conform
substantially to those procedures described in Addendum
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
k
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS Page: 13
15--32 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SPECIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1 Parcel: 761-230-009
30. PRIOR TO ANY PROJECT APPROVAL
30.PLANNING. 30 SP - Archeological Monitoring (cont.)
No. 1 to Environmental Impact Report No. 232."
30.PLANNING. 31 SP - Archeological Report
Prior to the approval of any and each land division or
development permit (use permit, plot plan, etc.), a
condition shall be applied to the implementing project
stating that:
"Prior to the issuance of building permits, a post
excavation report shall be provided to the Planning
Department. The report shall include, but not be limited
to, the mitigation and monitoring procedures that were
implemented in the process of grading for this project.
Building permits shall not be issued unless the mitigation
and monitoring procedures that were implemented
substantially conform to the procedures recommended by the
pre -grading agreement described in condition
30.PLANNING.30."
30.PLANNING. 32 SP - Avenue 62 buffering
Prior to the approval of any implementing land division
project within the SPECIFIC PLAN (i.e. tract map or parcel
map), the following condition shall be placed on the
implementing project PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMITS:
"Any residential development adjacent to Avenue 62 shall be
buffered by the width of a regulation golf fairway of three
hundred feet (3001) for the length of the frontage of the
project along Avenue 62."
This condition shall remain in full force and effect for
the duration of the project unless a change of use occurs
on the property immediately to the south, whereupon the
above condition may be considered as NOT APPLICABLE.
TRANS DEPARTMENT
30.TRANS. 1
SP - AMEND GENERAL PLAN
The project proponent shall submit an application to amend
the following General Plan Roads to the following
classifications:
a. Downgrade Madison Avenue south of 58th Avenue from an
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
INEFFECT
09/26/00 Riverside County LMS
1�_: 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Sr,r,CIFIC PLAN Case #: SP00218A1
30. PRIOR TO ANY PROJECT APPROVAL
30.TRANS. 1
Parcel: 761-230-009
SP - AMEND GENERAL PLAN (cont.)
Urban Arterial Highway (1341ROW) to an Arterial Highway
(110'ROW).
b. Downgrade -Avenue 60 from an Arterial Highway (1101ROW)
to a Secondary Highway (88' ROW) east of Monroe Street
to the project boundary.
Il��:ia����a
SP - TS/TS REQUIRED
Site specific traffic studies will be required for all
subsequent development proposals within the boundaries of
Specific Plan No. 218 in accordance with Traffic Study
Guidelines,
Page: 14:
INEFFECT
100. PRIOR TO ISSUE GIVEN BLDG PRMT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
100.PLANNING. 3 SP - COUNT RES,BUILD PERMITS ;'' INEFFECT
This condition is applied to assist the Planning
Department with tracking the build -out of the SPECIFIC PLAN
by automatically counting all the issuance of all new
residential building.permits on the County'a Land
Management System which are electronically associated with.:
the Specific Plan.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM: INITIAL STUDY
Environmental Assessment (E.A.) Number: 37465
Project Case Type (s) and Number(s): Specific Plan No. 218, Amended No. 1, Change of Zone No. 6454
Lead Agency Name: County of Riverside Planning Department
Address: County Administrative Center, 4080 Lemon Street,9th Floor, P.O. Box 1409, Riverside, Ca. 92502-1409
Contact Person: Keith Gardner, Planner III
Telephone Number: (909) 955-9076
Applicant's Name: Coral Mountain Development, Inc.
Applicant's Address: 41-865 Boardwalk, Ste 1, Palm Desert, Ca. 92211
I. PROJECT INFORMATION
A. Project Description:
Specific Plan 218, Amendment No. 1 proposes to modifu the planned land uses within Specific Plan 218.
The primary land use changes consist of a decrease in the maximum number of residential units allowed within
the specific plan from 4,262 to 2,740 with the following densities: 1,749 dwelling units on 336.5 acres of
Medium High Density Residential (5-8 dulac); 991 dwelling units on 287.3 acres of Medium Density
tesidential (2-5 dufac). Additionally, Specific Plan 218, Amendment No. 1 would designate eight planning
areas for golf courses and appurtenant uses on 541.2 acres, 1.1 acres ofcommunity facilities; and 26.9 acres of
commercial uses. A table showing how this project differs from the original specific plan is incorporated in this
staff report. Specific Plan 218, Amendment No. I would also change the name of the specific plan from
"Rancho La Quinta" to "Coral Mountain."
Change of Zone No. 6454 is a proposed textual change in the Specific Plan zoning ordinance that would add
Planning Areas 14 through 53 to the Specific Plan Zoning -Ordinance, and would redefine Planning Areas 1
through 13.
B. Type of Project: Site Specific ®; Countywide ❑; Community ❑; Policy ❑.
C. Total Project Area: 1279.3 Acres
Residential: Acres 731 ; Lots Units 2,740 ; Projected No. of Residents 7,340
Commercial: acres 26.9 : Lots ; Sq. Ft. of Bldg. Area Est. No. of Employees
Industrial: Acres . Lots Sq. Ft. of Bldg. Area Est. No. of Employees
Other: 541.2 acres of Golf Course
D. Assessor's Parcel No(s): 761-100-003, 005, 006, 761-110-001 through -004, 761-200-007, 761-210-002,
003, 007, 761-220-002 through 009, 761-220-018, through 021, 761-230-008 through 013, 761-230-015,
761-330-003 through 005,761-330-013, 761-340-001, 002
Street References: South of 58`h Street, north of 62n1 Street, west of Jackson Street
EA37465
F. Section, Township & Range Description or reference/attach a Legal Description: Section 26, 27, 28,
34, and 35 of Township 6 south, Range 7 east, S.B.B. & M.
G. Brief description of the existing environmental setting of the project site and its surroundings:
Vacant land lies in the north and northwest portions of the site. Agricultural uses are to the north, south, and
east of the site, vacant land lies to the west.
II. APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE POLICIES AND ZONING
A. Open Space and Conservation Map Designation(s): Adopted Specific Plans
B. Land Use Planning Area (L.U.P.A.) Information
1. L. U. P. A. Name(s): Lower Coachella Valley Land use Planning Area
2. Subarea, if any: None
3. Community Policy Area, if any: None
C. Community Plan Land Use Allocation Map Information
I. Community Plan, if any: Eastern Coachella Valley Community Plan
2. Community Plan Land Use Designation, if any: Specific Plan No. 218
D. Adopted Specific Plan Information
1. Name and Number of Specific Plan, if any: Specific Plan No. 218 - Rancho La Quinta
(Proposed to be re -named Coral Mountain)
2. Specific Plan Planning Area, and Policies, if any:
Planning Areas 2-6, 8-10, 12, 14-18.22, and 51 are proposed to be medium density residential areas
Planning Areas 1, 7, 11, 13, 19, 30, 48, and 50 are proposed to be golf courses and appurtenant uses
Planning Areas 23-29, 31, 32, 34-47, 49, and 53 are proposed to be medium -high density residential
areas
Planning Areas 21, 33, and 52 are proposed to be commercial areas
Planning Area 20 is proposed to be a community facility area
E. Existing Zoning: SP (Specific Plan)
F. Proposed Zoning, if any: SP
G. Adjacent and Surrounding Zoning: The City of La Quinta is to the west and north, A-1-10 (light
agriculture 20-acre minimum lots) is to the north and northwest, A-1-10 (light agricultural 10-acre minimum
lots) is to the east and south, W-2 (controlled development) is to the southwest, R-A-2 (residential -
agricultural 2 acre minimum lots) is to the southwest
EA37465
I1I. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below ( ® ) would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
;---pact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated
_ she checklist on the following pages.
0 Aesthetics
® Agriculture Resources
® Air Quality
Biological Resources
® Cultural Resources
® Geology/Soils
IV. DETERMINATION:
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
�l] Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use/Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
® Population/Housing
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
Public Seraices
❑ Recreation
® Transportation/Traffic
Utilities/Service systems
Other
El Mandatory Findings of Significance
A PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS PREPARED
1] I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment NOTHING
FURTHER IS REQUIRED because all potentially significant effects (a) have been adequately analyzed in an
earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable legal standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the proposed project.
® I find that although all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable legal standards, some changes or additions are necessary but none
of the conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Section 15162 exist. An ADDENDUM to a
previously -certified EIR or Negative Declaration has been prepared and will be considered by the approving body
or bodies.
I find that at least one of the conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Section 15162 exist,
but I further find that only minor additions or changes are necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply
to the project in the changed situation; therefore a SUPPLEMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ORT is required that need only contain the information necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for
n�c project as revised.
3 EA37465
❑ I find that at least one of the following conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Section
15162, exist and a SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required: (1) Substantial
`,angel are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration
..4e to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances
under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative
declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity ofpreviously identified significant effects; or (3) New information o fsubstanti al importance, which was
not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR
was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative
declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR
or negative declaration;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and
would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to
adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or,
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous
EIR or negative declaration would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project on the
environment, but the project proponents decline to ado t the mitigation measures or alternatives.
ZCAF't=� March 13 0QQ
Signatury 9,Date
k,.,(h Gardner. PlannerJ11 For Ate J. Laurence A .C.P. Pl nnin Director
Printed Name
V. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ASSESSMENT
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQa) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 - 21 I78.1). this Initial5tudv
has been prepared to analyze the proposed project to determine any potential significant impacts upon the environment that would result
from construction and implementation ofthe project. In accordance with California Code of Regulations. Section 15063. this initial Study
is a preliminary analysis prepared by the Lead Agency. the County of Riverside, in consultation WTTWother jurisdictional agencies, to
determine whether a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration. or an Environmental Impact Report is required for the
proposed project. The purpose of this Initial Study is to inform the decision -makers, affected agencies, and the public of potential
environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed project.
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant %eith Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
AESTHETICS Would the project
1. Scenic Resources
a) Have a substantial effect upon a scenic highway corridor within which it is ❑ Cl Cl
1^^ated?
4 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No .
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings and unique or landmark features; obstruct any prominent scenic
vista or view open to the public; or result in the creation of an aesthetically ❑ ❑ 0
offensive site open to public view?
Source: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan (CGP) Fig. VI.45, Environmental Impact Report No. 232
(EIR 232)
Findings of Fact: The California Desert is a recreational resort area attracting substantial numbers of tourist and
travelers. The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No. 218. The
aesthetic impacts of the adopted Specific Plan were adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and
adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1998. The propose Specific plan
amendment evaluated in this EA would modify the configuration of residential and open uses, and decrease the
number of residential units. No significant new changes in circumstances have occurred nor will the proposed
modifications to Specific Plan No. 218 result in new significant visual impacts not previously disclosed. Thus, no
fi --her study of this topic is warranted.
Miti_gation: None required
Mon itoring:.None required
2. htt. Palomar Observatory
Interfere with the night time use of the Mt. Palomar Observatory, as protected ❑ ❑ ❑
through Riverside County Ordinance No. 655?
Source: GIS data base, Ord. No. 655, CGP Fig. II.27, EIR 329
Findings of Fact: This project will not impact the Mount Palomar Oberservatory.
Mitigation: None required.
Monitoring None required.
3. Other Lighting Issues
a) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely ❑ ❑ ❑
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
fib) Expose residential property to unacceptable light levels? ❑ ❑ ❑
Source: EIR 232
EA3 7465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Findings ofFact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific plan No.
218. The light and glare impacts of the the adopted Specific Plan were adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which was
certified and adopted by the county of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. The proposed amended
to the Specific Plan will decrease the intensity of development. No significant change in circumstances have
occurred nor will the proposed modifications to Specific PIan No. 218 result in a significant impact with respect
to light and glare, because fewer sources of light would be introduced as a result of these modifications.
Mitigation_: None required.
M nitorin : None rquired.
AGRICULTURE RESOURCES Would the project
4. Agriculture
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland ❑ ❑ ❑
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
u) uttittct wtrntexisting agricultural use, or a Williamson Act (agricultural
serve) contract (Riv. Co. Agricultural Land Conservation Contract Maps)? ❑ ❑
c) Cause development ofnon-agricultural uses within 300 feet of agriculturally
zoned property (Ordinance No. 625 Right -to -Farm)? ❑ ❑ ❑
d) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their
location ornature, could result in conversion ofFarmland, to non-agricultural use? ❑ ❑ ❑
Source: EIR 232
Findings Of Fact. The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan upon agricultural resources were adequately evaluated in the EIR 232,
which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supmisors-ii�October 1988. The project
evaluated in this EA involves a proposal to change the configuration of land uses and associated infrastructure
elements within the boundaries of the previously approved Specific PIan area. There have been no changes in
circumstances since the time EIR 232 was certified the would result in new significant impacts, and the proposed
Specific Plan amendment will not result anew significant impact upon agricultural resources.
Mitl�ation: one required
Moni�todM None required
AIR QUALITY Would the project
5. Air Quality Impacts
1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air qualityelan? ❑ ❑
EA3'465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less 1%,
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or ❑ ❑ ❑
projected air quality violation.
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable 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)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors which are located within I mile of the project ❑ ❑ ❑
site to project substantial point source emissions?
e) Involve the construction of a sensitive receptor located within one mile of ❑ ❑ ® ❑
an existing substantial point source emitter?
f) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ❑ ❑ ❑
Source: EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The applicant is requesting an amendment to the approved Specific Plan that would, among other
things, alter the arrangement of uses within the Specific Plan.
The project contains; commercial and residential uses that are considered typical of such a development and no
unique sources of odors or emissions are associated with the modifications to the Specific Plan. Similarly, no
ificant stationary source emissions would be introduced to the project area as a result of the planned
modifications to the Specific Plan. EIR No. 232 presented analysis and mitigation measures which make the. project
consistent with the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan policies related to air quality. Any incidental
emission sources will be strictly regulated by local, State and Federal requirements.
Mitigation: Potential significant adverse impacts to air quality shall be evaluated by Addendum Environmental
Impact report (AEIR232) to EIR 232 required for this project, and appropriate mitigation measures shall be
identified.
Nionitorinw Monitoring shall be determined after the mitigation measures for this project have been established (i.e.,
upon completion of AEIR232.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project
6. Wildlife & Vegetation
a) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, ❑ 0 ❑
Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
conservation plan?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any endangered, or threatened species, as listed in Title 14 of the ❑ ❑ ❑
California Code of Regulations (Sections 670.2 or 670.5) or in Title 50, Code of
Federal Regulations (Sections 17.11 or 17.12)?
7 EA3 7 465
Less than
Potentially signi[ie"t Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
c) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through hal7itat
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. Wildlife Service?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident migratory ❑ ❑ ❑
wildlife corridors, or impede: the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Have a substantial adverse effect 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 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
f) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined
by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, ❑ ❑ ❑
or other means?
g) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological ❑ ❑ ❑
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
ource: EIR 232
F' ' in s of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
2 t ,,. Numerous biological site surveys were conducted during preparation of EIR 232, certified in 1988. The surveys
indicate that past grading activities and development on portions of adjacent lands has resulted in the removal of
typical desert habitat and an increase in impervious surfaces which will prevent normal replenishment of existing
species. The site does not contain streams, or other water bodies that wouId be under the jurisdiction of either the
California Department of Fish & Game or Army Corps of Engineers. There is no habitat of importance on the site.
The majority of the site is vacant.
The proposed modifications to Specific Plan No. 218 will only affect land located within the boundaries of the
Specific Plan area. The impact of developing this area has been previously evaluated. -Therefore, no new significant
impact upon biological resources not previously identified will result. Some changes in circumstances may have
occurred since the time the EIR was certified in 1988. Accordingly, same updating of relevant information is
required and will be provided in AEIR 232.
Mitigation: Potential significant adverse impacts to biological resources shall be evaluated by the addendum
Environmental impact report (AEIR232) to EIR 232 required for this project and appropriate mitigation measures
shall be identified.
Monitorins: Monitoring shall be determined after the mitigation measures for this project have been established (i.e..
upon completion of AEIR 232).
'LTURAL RESOURCES Would the project
7. rlistoric Resources
a) Alter or destroy an historic site?
8 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical ❑
resource as defined in California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5?
Source: Specific Plan No. 218, EIR 232, Cultural Resources Report dated September 1, 1998 by Bruce Love
Findings of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218. The impact of the adopted Specific PIan upon cultural resources were adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which
was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. The project
evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, and decrease
the number of residential units.
The cultural resources report conducted for the Addendum Environmental Impact Report indicated that
approximately 40 different archeological sites are located within the project boundaries. The cultural resources
report suggested mitigation measures to insure the impacts to the cultural and historic resources are mitigated to a
level below significance. Accordingly, this project is conditioned to comply with the mitigation measures
prescribed by the cultural resources report.
Mitigation: Impacts to cultural and historic resources will be mitigated through the measures prescribed by the
cultural resources report, and by the conditions of approval written by the Planning Department.
L iton� The Planning Department will monitor impacts to cultural and historic resources prior to grading
permits and building permits.
8. Archaeological Resources
a) Alter or destroy an archaeological site. ❑ ® ❑ 0
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological ❑ ® ❑ ❑
resource pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Section 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries? ❑ ® ❑ ❑
d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ❑ ® 0
Source: Specific Plan No. 218, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan upon cultural resources were adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which
was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. The project
evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, decrease the
number of residential units, and increase open space within specific planning areas.
The cultural resources report conducted for the Addendum Environmental Impact Report indicated that
approximately 40 different archeological sites are located within the project boundaries. The cultural resources
r I suggested mitigation measures to insure the impacts to the cultural and historic resources are mitigated to a
level below significance. Accordingly, this project is conditioned to comply with the mitigation measures
9 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
prescribed by the cultural resources report.
Mitigation: Impacts to archeological resources will be mitigated through the measures prescribed by the cultural
resources report, and by the conditions of approval written by the Planning Department.
Monitoring: The Planning Department will monitor impacts to archeological resources prior to grading permits and
building permits.
9. Paleontological Resources
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or ❑ ❑ ❑
unique geologic feature?
Source: Specific Plan No. 218, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan upon Paleontological resources were adequately evaluated in EIR
232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. The
project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, and
decrease the number; of residential units. No changes in circumstances have occurred that will result in new
significant impacts nor will the proposed modifications to Specific Plan No. 218 result in a new significant impact
.n cultural resources not previously identified. No further study is warranted.
Mitigation: Impacts to archeological resources ,vill be mitigated through the measures prescribed by the cultural
resources report, and by the conditions of approval written by the Planning Department.
Monitorine. The Planning Department will monitor impacts to paleontological resources prior to grading permits
and building permits.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Definitions for Land Use Suitability Ratings
Where indicated below, the appropriate Land Use Suitability Rating(s) has been checked.
NA - Not Applicable S - Generally Suitable PS - Provisionally Suitable
U - Generally Unsuitable R - Restricted
a. Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
10. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone or County Fault Hazard Zones
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? ❑ ❑ ❑
A-P Zones NA ® PS ❑ U ❑ R ❑
1H Zones NA ® PS ❑ U ❑ R. ❑
Source: CGP fig. VI.1 - VI.3 EIR 232
10 EA37a65
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Findings of Fact: The site is located within an area subject to ground shaking as a result of an earthquake. However,
according to the County Comprehensive General Plan, the proposed project site is not within a Alquist - Priolo
Zone, County Fault Hazard Zone or Liquefaction potential Zone.
The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan with respect to
earthquake hazards was adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County of
Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific
Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, decrease the number of residential units, and increase open space
within the previously approved Specific Plan area. No changes in circumstances have occurred that will result in
new significant impacts upon cultural resources not previously identified. No further study is, warranted.: ,
Mitigation: Mitigation will be through each subsequent development application and compliance with the Uniform
Building Code, Ordinance No. 457.
Monitoring: Monitoring to be provided by Building and Safety Department and through Ordinance No. 457.
11. Liquefaction Potential Zone
Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
r, ❑ so PS
SUurce:
CGP Fig. VIA EIR 232
U❑ , R❑
Findings of Fact: The site located within a possible liquefaction area.
1 04 ■ ■
The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No. 218. The impacts
of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to liquefaction hazards were adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which was
certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 198.8. The project evaluated
in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, decrease the number of
residential units, and increase open space within the approved Specific Plan area. No changes in circumstances have
occurred that will result in new significant impacts nor will the proposed modifications to Specific Plan No. 21S
result in a new impact upon cultural resources not previously identified. Further study is warranted at the
implementing project stage of development.
Mitigation: Compliance with the Uniform Building Code, Ordinance no. 457. Additionally, this project will be
conditional further when development projects are proposed (tract maps, parcel maps, etc).
Monitoring: Monitoring to be provided by Building and Safety Department and through Ordinance No. 457, and
through the building permit review process.
12. Ground shaking Zone
`ng seismic ground shaking? ❑ ® ❑ ❑
NA❑ S® PS❑ U❑ R❑
i
I I EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Source: CGP Fig. VI.5 EIR 232
Findings of Fact: This project is within a IIB Groung shaking Zone. The Riverside County Comprehensive General
Plan identifies the proposed project as rated as suitable. According to the General Plan, this means that expected
levels of ground shaking are generally less than or equal to design levels as defined in the Uniform Building Code
(UBC). Potential impacts from ground shaking can be mitigated to a level of insignificance through compliance with
the UBC and the building permit review process. Such Compliance shall be required.
Mitigation: Potential impacts from ground shaking can be mitigated to a level of insignificance through compliance
with UBC and building permit process.
Monitorinc: This mitigation measure shall be monitored by the Department of Building and Safety
13. Landslide Risk
Be located on a geologic 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 landslide, ❑ ❑
lateral spreading, collapse, or rockfall hazards?
NA® S❑ PS El U0 R❑
F -rce: Riv. Co. 800 Scale Seismic Maps or On -site Inspection, CGP Fig. VI.6
Findings of Fact: The specific plan area contains moderate -to -gently sloping terrain. People or property will not
be exposed to possible slope failure or rockfall hazards.
The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No. 218. The impacts
of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to landslide hazards was adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which was
certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. ,No changes in
circumstances have occurred that will result in new significant impacts nor will the proposed modifications to
Specific Plan No. 218 result in a new significant impact upon cultural resources noLpreviously identified. No
further study is warranted.
Mitigation: None required
Monitoring: None required
14. Ground Subsidence
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become ❑ ❑ ❑
unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in ground subsidence?
Source: Resolution No. 94-125
F dings of Fact; The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to geotechnical hazards was adequately evaluated in
EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988.
12 EA3"4165
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements,
decrease the number of residential units, and increase open space entirely within Specific Plan No. 218. No changes
in circumstances have occurred that will result in new significant impacts nor will the proposed modifications to
Specific Plan No. 218 result in a new significant impact upon cultural resources not previously identified. No
further study is warranted.
Mitigation: None required
Monitoring: None required
15. Other Geologic Hazards
Such as seiche, mudflow or volcanic hazard?
Source: EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The project site is not known to be susceptible to other geologic hazards.
Mitigation: None required
'%nitorine: None required
b. Would the project:
16. Slopes ® 0 0
a) Change topography or ground surface relief features?
b) Create cut or fill slopes greater than 2:1 or higher than 10 feet?
c) Result in grading that affects or negates subsurface sewage disposal
systems?
Source: Riv. Co. 800 Scale Slope Maps, Specific Plan No. 218, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The project site contains moderate -to -gently sloping surfaces with little topographic relief. No
extensive cut of fill slopes are required to develop the site. The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents
modifications to adopted Specific Plan No. 218. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to
geotechnical issues was adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County of
Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the
Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, decrease the number of residential units, and increase open
space within Specific Planning Areas. The configuration of the planned residential and open space -golf course uses
will change, possibly affecting the drainage and other infrastructure systems. The amendment includes changes to
the project drainage plan. Accordingly, some updating of the previous analysis is required.
N1iti,aation: Potential significant adverse impacts to slopes shall be evaluated by the Addendum Evironmental
)act Report (AEIR 232) to EIR 232 required for this project and appropriate mitigation measures shall be
identified.
13 EA3;i65
Lessthan
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact,
Incarparated
Monitoring Monitoring shall be determined after the mitigation measures for this project have been established
(i.e., upon completion of AEIR 232).
17. Soils
a) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creatin- substantial risks to life or property? ❑ ❑ ❑
Source: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Surveys, EIR 232
FindingEofFact• The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No'. 218. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to geotechnical issues was adequately evaluated in EIR
232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. The
project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, decrease
the number of residential units, and increase open space within Specific Planning Areas. No changes in
circumstances have occurred that will result in new significant impacts nor will the proposed modifications to
Specific Plan No. 218 result in new significant impact not previously identified. No further study is warranted:
Mitigation: Compliance with the measures set forth in the Addendum to EIR 232.
-iitodnlr: Monitoring to be provided by the Building and Safety Department and through Ordinance No, 457.
18. Erosion
a) Change deposition, siltation or erosion which may modify the channel of ❑ Q ❑
a river or stream or the bed of a lake?
b) Result in any increase in water erosion either on or off site?
Source: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Surveys, EIR 232
Finding—s of Fact. The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modification`s-ta adopted Specific Plan No.
218. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to water and wind driven erosion of Soils was adequately
evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October
of 1988. The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use
arrangements, decrease the number of residential units, increase open space within the Specific Planning Area. No
changes in circumstances have occurred that will result in new significant impacts nor will the proposed
modifications to Specific Plan No. 218 result in a new significant impact not previously identified. No further study
is warranted
Mitl Compliance with the measures set forth in the Addendum to EIR 232
Monitoring: Monitoring to be provided by the Building and Safety Department and through Ordinance No. 457.
14 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
19. Wind Erosion and Blowsand from project either on or off site
Be impacted by or result in an increase in wind erosion and blowsand, either ❑ ❑ ❑
on or off site?
Source: CGP Fig. VI. 1-VI.2, Ord. 460, Sec. 14.2 & Ord. 484, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to water and wind driven erosion of soils was adequately
evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October
of 1988. The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use
arrangements, decrease the number of residential units, increase open space within the Specific Planning Area. No
changes in circumstances have occurred that will result in new significant impacts nor will the proposed
modifications to Specific Plan No. 218 result in anew significant impact not previously identified. No further study,
is warranted.
Mitigation: This project will be mitigated through the measures recommended in the Addendum to EIR 232.
Monitoring: Subsequent development applications will be monitored through the Department of,Building and
Safety.
+ZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -Would the project
20. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
❑ ❑ ❑
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
❑ ❑ ❑
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation plan?
❑ ❑ ❑
d) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutelv hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed
❑ ❑ ❑
school?
e) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and. as a result, would
❑ ❑ ❑
it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Source: EIR 232
Findings -of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to Specific Plan No. 218.
The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to blowsand hazards and wind erosion in general were
adequately evaluated in EIR 232, ,.t•hich was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors
i- `lcober of 1988. Commercial uses on the site may utilize. store or transport hazardous materials and wastes
i.__.Lding but not limited to petroleum products, pesticides. cleaning agents, etc. Limited quantities of hazardous
materials and wastes may also be used and generated by maintenance facilities associated with commercial uses.
15 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Such materials and wastes must handled and disposed of according to regulatory guidelines and industry standards
enforced at that time, resulting in less than significant impacts.
The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements,
decrease the numberof residential units, and increase open space within the previously approved Specific Plan Area.
No changes in circumstances have occurred that will result in new significant impacts nor will the proposed
modifications to Specific Plan No 218 result in anew significant impact not previously identified. No further study
is warranted.
Mitigation: Compliance with the measures set forth in EIR No 232.
Monitoring: Monitoring to be provided by the Building and Safety Department and by compliance with applicable
County ordinances.
21. Airports
a) Result in an inconsistency with an Airport Master Plan? El❑
b) Require review by the Airport Land Use Commission? ❑ 0 ❑
c) For a project'located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan
' ,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 ❑ ❑ 0
project area?
d) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, or heliport, would the
ro'ect result in a safety hazard for eo le residing or working in the project area? 0
Source: COP Fig. II.18.2-I1.18.4, II.18.8-I1.18.10 & IV. 27-IV.36, EIR 232
Findings of Fact_ The Specific Plan area is not part of an Airport Master Plan, and is not within the Influence Area
Boundary any airport. The Desert Resorts Regional Airport(formerly Thermal Airport) lies approximately 3 miles
to the east of the project site. -Z I -
The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No 218. The impacts
of the adopted Specific Plan with respdcts to hazards was adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and
adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October 1988. As part of the EIR process, the original
Specific Plan was reviewed by the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) and determined that
this project will not be impacted by the Desert Resorts Regional Airport.
The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, and
decrease the number of residential units. No changes in circumstances have occurred that xvill result in new
significant impacts nor will the proposed modifications to Specific Plan No 218 result in a new significant impact
not previously identified. No furthers study is warranted.
N1 . L. gation: Compliance with the measures set forth in EIR 232
16
EA374fi5
Lw than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Monti No further monitoring required
22. Hazardous Fire Area
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas ❑ ❑ ❑
or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Source: CGP Fig. VI.30 - VI.31
Findings of Fact: The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land
use arrangements, and decrease the number of residential units within the Specific Plan area. The applicant is also
proposing related changes to the Specific Plan drainage and circulation plans. While the reduction in residential
dwelling units would result in fewer calls for service. Additionally, this project is not located within a. hazardous
fire area.
Mitigation: Potential significant adverse impacts resulting from exposure of people or structures to fire hazard areas
shall be evaluated by the Addendum Environmental Impacts Reports (AEIR) to EIR 232 required for this project
and appropriate mitigation measures shall be identified. Additionally, this project will be mitigated by the conditons
of approval written by the Fire Department.
litoring: The Fire Department will monitor this project through the development process.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project
23. Water Quality Impacts
a) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in
® ❑ ❑ ❑
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site?
b) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
❑ ❑ ® ❑
c) 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 (e.g., the production rate of pre-
❑ ❑ ® ❑
existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
d) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional
❑ ❑ ® ❑
sources of polluted runoff?
e) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
❑ ❑ ❑
delineation map?
f) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede
:direct flood flows?
❑ ❑
17
EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Source: SP 218, EIR 232
Findin s of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No
218. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to Hydrology and Water Quality was adequately
evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October
of 1988. As indicated in EIR 232, no structures are located or planned within a 100 - year flood plan. In addition,
development occurring the Specific Plan area is subject to NPDES regulations, including provision for best
management practices (BMPs), both during and after construction activities.
Changes in the circumstances of the project, such as recent change to the mapping of the 100-year flood plain and
the proposed changes to the project drainage system warrant additional study to determine if any new significant
impacts will results.
Mitigation: Potential significant adverse impacts to hydrology and water quality shall be evaluated by the
Addendum Environmental Impact Report (AEIR 232) to EIR 232 required for this project and appropriate
mitigation measures shall be identified. Additionally, implementing development proposals will be`mitigated
through conditions of approval written by the Coachella Valley Water District (CV WD).
f..,;ni orin : Monitoring shall be through the CVWD through the development review process and the building
permit review process.
24. Floodplains
Degree of Suitability in 100-Year Floodplains. As indicated below, the appropriate Degree of Suitability has
been checked.
NA - Not Applicable ® U - Generally Unsuitable ❑ R - Restricted ❑
a) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
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?
b) Changes in absorption rates or the rate and amount of surface runofP. ❑ ❑ ® ❑
c) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam ❑ ❑ ❑
(Dam Inundation Area)?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ❑ ❑ ® ❑
Source: CGP Fig. VI.7 & CGP Fig. VI.8, EIR 232
Fdinas of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No
The impact of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to Hydrology and Water Quality was adequately
evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October
Is EA3 465
Lcss than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
of 1988. As indicated in EIR 232, the Specific Plan area is influenced by flooding and drainage issues as identified
in the Comprehensive General Plan. The site is not subject to the effects of dam inundation, as no dams are located
upstream of the site. Further, no structures are located or planned within the 100-year flood plain.
Changes in the circumstances of the project, such as recent change to the mapping of the 100-year flood plain and
the proposed changes to the project drainage system warrant updating of the information in EIR 232.
Mitigation: Potential significant adverse impacts to floodplains shall be evaluated by the Addendum Environmental
Impact Report (AEIR 232) to EIR 232 required for this project, and by the conditions of approval written by the
Coachella Valley Water District.
Monitoring: The Coachella Valley Water District will monitor this project through the development process. "`
LAND USE/PLANNING Would the project
25. Land Use
a) Result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an ❑ ❑ ❑
area?
b) Affect land use within a city sphere of influence and/or within adjacent city
�r county boundaries?
:ce: CGP, GIS, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: Rancho La Quinta (Specific Plan No 218, EIR 232) is a master planned community which was
approved on.more than 1,280 acres of land located south of Interstate 10. The Specific Plan area is within the
Sphere of Influence of the City of La Quinta. The proposed changes in this project consist primarily of the change
in the name of the project to Coral Mountain, a decrease in the amount of residential development and an increase
in the amount of golf course area. These modifications require further environmental review to determine the
significance of the changes on existing and planned surrounding land uses.
Mitigation: No mitigation required.
Monitoring: No additional monitoring necessary.
26. Planning
a) Be consistent with the site's existing or proposed zoning?
❑
❑
b) Be compatible with existing surrounding zoning?
❑
❑
c) Be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses?
❑
❑
d) Be consistent with the land use designations and policies of the
®
❑
❑
Comprehensive General Plan (including those of any applicable Specific Plan).
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community
k Juding a low-income or minority community)?
Source: CGP, EIR 232
19 EA37165
Less than
Potentially Signilcant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Findings of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218, Amended No. 1. The impacts of the adopted specific plan with respect to Land Use & Planning was adequately
evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of
1988. The proposed amendment would decrease the amount of residential development and increase the amount
of golf course area in the Specific Plan No 218 area. Related changes to the Specific Plan drainage and circulation
plans are also proposed.
The proposed revisions to the Specific Plan would not revise any of the existing general plan or zoning designations
on the property. None of these modifications would introduce a new land use type or increase the intensity -of
development beyond that which is presently allowed by the adopted Specific Plan. Given this, no significant
impacts under this impact category, are expected to occur.
Mitigation: None required
Monitoring: None required
MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project
27. Mineral Resources
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource in an area
'Sifted or designated by the State that would be of value to the region or the
residents of the State?
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 ❑ Cl ❑
plan?
c) Be an incompatible land use located adjacent to a State classified or
designated area or existing surface mine?
d) Expose people or property to hazards from proposed, existing or abandoned
quarries or mines? ❑ ❑ ❑ '
Source: CGP Fig. VI.41-VI.42, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan
No. 218. The impacts of the adopted specific plan with respect to mineral resources was adequately evaluated in
EIR 232, which was certified and adopted County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988.
According to the County Comprehensive General Plan, Figure VIA1, "Mineral Resources," the project site is not
included in, or in close proximity to, a State classified or designated MRZ-2 mineral resource zone.
The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, and
decrease the number of residential units and increase golf course area within specific Planning Areas. No changes
in circumstances have occurred that will result in new signif cant impacts nor will the proposed modifications to
Specific Plan No 218 result in a new significant impact not previously identified. No further study is warranted.
1\ : ation: None required
20 EA3'165
Less than
Potentially Significant Less 'Tian
Significant with Significant No
lmpact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Monitoring: None required
NOISE Would the project result in
Definitions for Noise Acceptability Ratings
Where indicated below, the appropriate Noise Acceptability Rating(s) has been checked.
NA - Not Applicable A - Generally Acceptable B - Conditionally Acceptable
C - Generally Unacceptable D - Land Use Discouraged
28. Airport Noise
a) 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?
NA A® B❑ C❑ D❑
b) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ❑ ❑ ❑
NA❑ AS B❑ CO D❑
Source: CGP Fig. I .J.8.5, II.18.11 & VI.12;1984 AICUZ Report, M.A.F.B., EIR 232
I _ Jngs of Fact. The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218. The impacts of the adopted specific plan with respect to noise was adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which
was certified and adopted County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. According to the analysis
contained in EIR 232, the property is far removed from most noise generators, including airports, with the exception
of the freeway traffic.
The proposed amendment to Specific Plan No. 218 would decrease the amount of residential development and.
increase the amount of open space. None of these changes would alter the conclusion in EIR 232, nor has any new
change in circumstances occurred that would require further examination of this issue. No further study is
warranted. - -
Mitigation; None required
Monitoring: None required
29. Railroad Noise
NA❑ A® B❑ C❑ D❑
Source: CGP Fig. VI.11, VI.13 - VI.16, EIR 232
Findin s ofFact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
2 )The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to noise was adequately evaluated in EIR 232, which
was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. According to the
21 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
analysis contained in EIR 232, the property is far removed from most noise generators, including rail lines, with
the exception of local traffic.
The proposed amendment to Specific Plan #218 would decrease the amount ofresidential development and increase
the amount of open space. None of these changes would alter the conclusion in EIR 232, nor has any new change
in circumstances occurred that would require further examination of this issue. No further study is warranted.
Mitigation: None required
Monitoring: None required
30. Highway Noise
NA❑ AS B❑ CO D❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑
Source: CGP Fig. VI.11, VI.17 - VI.29, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218, the majority of which is developed. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to noise was
evaluated in EIR 232; which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October
of q88. The nearest highway to this project is Interstate 10. which is located approximately 9 miles to the north.
Mitigation: No mitigation required.
Monitoriniz: No monitoring required.
31. Other Noise
NA® A❑ B❑ CO D❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Source: CGP Fig. Vl.l 1, EIR 232
Findings of Fact:
Mitigation: None required
Monitoring: None required
32. Noise Effects on or by the Project
a) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project ❑ ❑ ® ❑
vicinity above levels existing without the project?
b) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ ® ❑
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
22 EA37465
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
significant
with
Significant
No
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Incorporated
c) 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
❑
❑
®
p
other agencies?
d) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration
'
or groundborne noise levels?
❑
0
®
❑
Source: CGP Fig. VI.11, EIR 232
Findin s ofFact. The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218, the majority of which is developed. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to noise was
evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October
of 1988.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation is required.
Monitoring: No additional monitoring required.
POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project
33. Housing
a) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑
istruction of replacement housing elsewhere?
b} Create a demand for additional housing, particularly housing affordable to ❑ ❑ ❑
households earning 80% or less of the County's median income?
c) Disp.lace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑
replacement housing elsewhere?
d) Affect a County Redevelopment Project Area? ❑ ❑ ❑
e) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ❑ ❑ ❑
f) 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)?
Source: CGP, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The proposed project in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No. 218,
which is already substantially developed. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to population and
housing was evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of
Supervisors in October of 1988.
The modifications to the Specific Plan proposed by the applicant would reduce the number of residential units
allowed at build out of the Specific Plan. Thus, impacts have been analyzed and mitigated for in EIR 232. Since the
r- -*)osed project with reduce housing impacts beyond those considered, no impacts to housing are expected to occur
i. .n this proposed revisions to the Specific Plan and no further study is warranted.
23 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Mitigation: None required
Monitorine: None required
PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered government facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction ofwhich could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
34. Fire Services
Source: CGP Fig. IV. 16-IV.18, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modifications to adopted Specific Plan No.
218. The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to fire service was evaluated in EIR 232, which was
certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. As indicated in that
document, the Specific Plan is subject to fire service programs, land use programs and land use standards of the
Comprehensive General Plan. Uses within the Specific Plan are also subject to mitigation measures listed in EIR
232 pertaining to fire services.
r
TL -.,project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land.use arrangements,
L_ _cease the number of.residential units, and increase golf course area within the Specific Plan area. The applicant
is also proposing related changes to the Specific Plan drainage and circulation plans. While the reduction in
residential dwelling units would result in fewer calls for service, the proposed changes to the circulation plan may
affect emergency access and response times for the Fire Department. Thus, further study is warranted.
Mitigation: This project will be mitigated by the conditions of approval written by the Fire Department.
M nitorin : Monitoring for this project will be through the Fire Department.
35. Sheriff Services
Source: CGP Fig. IV. 17-IV.18, EIR 232
Fitdings of Fact: The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan with respect to Sheriff service was evaluated in EIR'
232, which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. As
indicated in that document, uses within the Specific Plan are subject to Sheriff services programs and land use
standards of the Comprehensive General Plan. They are also subject to measures listed in EIR 232 pertaining to
Sheriff services. The Sheriff maintains Neighborhood Watch programs and encourages the principles of crime
prevention to be incorporated into development projects.
The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements,
-ase the number of residential units, and increase golf course area within the Specific Plan area. The applicant
is also proposing related changes to the Specific Plan drainage and circulation plans. While the reduction in
24 EA3 465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
residential dwelling units would result in fewer calls for service, the proposed changes to the circulation plan may
affect the response time of the Fire Department. Thus, further study is warranted.
Mitigation, Potential significant adverse impacts to crime prevention and protection services slopes shall be
evaluated by the Addendum Environmental Impact Report (AEIR232) to EIR 232 required for this project, and
appropriate mitigation measures shall be identified.
Nlonitorinlx: Monitoring shall be determined after the mitigation measures for this project have been established
(i.e., upon completion of AEIR232)
36. Schools ® 0
ri
Source: CGP Fig. IV. 17-IV.18, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The revision to the previously adopted Specific Plan present new impacts to the local.school
district. Approximately one-third of the proposed dwelling units within the Specific Plan are not restricted, whereas
the other two-thirds of the proposed dwelling units are to be active -adult and country -club communities The
proposed modificati6o's to, the Specific Plan would, among other things, reduce the number of units developed
w=`llin the Specific Plan area.
Mitigation: Impacts to the Coachella Valley Unified School District will be mitigated through state law.
Monitoring: This project will be monitored through the planning process, and through the building permit review
process.
37. Libraries ❑ ❑ ❑
Source: CGP Fig. IV.17-IV.18, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan upon library service was evaluated in EIR 232, which
which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in.October of 1988. No significant
impact on library services were identified.
The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements,
decrease the number of residential units, and increase golf course area within specific Planning areas. Due to the
reduction of residential units within the Specific Plan area, impacts identified in EIR 232 would be incrementally
reduced from that previously evaluated. Since the proposed revisions will reduce impacts beyond those considered,
no new impacts to library services are expected to occur from the proposed revision and no further study is
warranted.
,ration: None required
25 EA? is65
Monitoring: None required
38. Health Services
Source: CGP Fig. IV. I74V.18, EIR 232
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
SigniflUnt with Signiacant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
❑ ❑ ❑
Findings of Fact: The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan upon health services were evaluated in EIR 232, which
was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. No significant
impact on library services were identified.
The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements,
decrease the number of residential units, and increase recreation space within specific Planning areas. Due to the
reduction of residential units within the Specific Plan area, impacts identified in EIR 232 would be incrementally
reduced from that previously evaluated. Since the proposed revisions will reduce impacts from those previously
considered, no new impacts to health services are expected to occur from the proposed revisions and no further
study is warranted.
Mitigation: None required
Mnnittoring: None required
RECREATION
39. Parks and Recreation
a) Would the project include recreational facilities or require the construction
or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect ❑ ❑ ❑
on the environment?
b) Would the project include the use of existing neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of ❑ ❑ ❑
the facility would occur or be accelerated?
c) Is the project located within a C.S.A. or recreation and park district with a
Community Parks and Recreation Plan (Quimby fees)? ❑ ❑ ❑ 19
Source: CGP Fig. IV. 19-IV.20, Ord. No. 460, Section 10.35, Ord. No. 659, EIR 232
Findin s of Fact: The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan upon parks and recreation were evaluated in EIR 232,
which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988.
The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements,
decrease the number of residential units, and increase golf course area within specific Planning areas. Due to the
reduction of residential units %vithin the Specific Plan area, impacts identified in EIR 232 would be incrementally
reduced from that previously evaluated. Further, these modifications would increase the amount of recreation and
c n space land within the Specific Plan area. Since the proposed revisions will reduce impacts from those
p._-�iously considered, no new impacts to parks and recreation are expected to occur from the proposed revisions
26 EA3 465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation impact Impact
Incorporated
and no further study is warranted.
Mitigation: Compliance with the measures set forth in EIR 232, and through the conditions of approval on this
project.
Monitoring: Monitoring shall be provided by the Coachella Valley Park and Recreation District.
40. Recreational Trails.
Source: CGP Fig. IV.19-IV.24, Riv. Co. 800 Scale Equestrian Trail Maps, Open Space and Conservation Map for
Western County trail alignments, EIR 232, Eastern Coachella Valley Community Plan (ECVP).
Findings of Fact: The impacts of the adopted Specific Plan upon recreation and trails were evaluated in EIR #232,
which was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. The project
evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, decrease the
number of residential units, and increase golf course area within specific Planning areas. Since none of these, actions
would increase the demand for trails, or modify an existing trail, no new impacts are expected to occur from the
proposed revisions.
P --prding to the ECVP, there are community trails and bike trails shown along Madison Street, 60`h Avenue,
l,_ _Aroe Street, and along the eastern boundary of the project site.
Mitigation: The developer is conditioned by the Regional Parks and Open Space Department to provide the trails
as shown on the ECVP during each implementing proposal (tract map, parcel map, etc.).
Monitorinsx: This project to be monitored though the building permit review process by the Regional Parks and
Open Space Department.
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project = _
41. Circulation
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)?
b) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ® ❑
c) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion management agency for designated road or ❑ ® ❑ ❑
highways?
d) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in ❑ ❑ ❑
t*-ffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
e) Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? ❑ ❑
27 EA37465
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
with
Significant
No
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Incorponted
f) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g. , sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
g) Cause an effect upon, or a need for new or altered maintenance of roads?
p13
h) Cause an effect upon circulation during the project's construction?
p
p
®
❑
i) Result in inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
j) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g.
bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Source: CGP Fig. IV. 1-IV.11, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The traffic and circulation impacts of the adopted Specific Plan were evaluated in EIR 232, which
was certified and adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. An updated traffic
study was prepared for this proposal.
The project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements,
decrease the number of residential units, and increase golf course area within specific Plan area. The reduction in
residential units will create fewer vehicle trips at build out of the specific Plan than originally evaluated. The
applicant is also proposing amendments to the planned circulation system. Further study of potential traffic and
c;-,ulation impacts is required.
With regard to parking, Specific Plan No. 218 contains development standards which include parking guidelines
for individual uses allowed within the Specific Plan. The impact of the Specific Plan on this issue was evaluated
in EIR 232, which concluded that no significant impact to parking facilities would occur. The development
standards contained in the Specific Plan will not be altered by the amendments currently proposed, so no additional
impacts to parking facilities beyond that previously evaluated are expected to occur. Therefore, no further analysis
of this issue is warranted.
Mitigation: This project will be mitigated through the conditions of approval written by the Transportation
Department.
Monitoring: Monitoring for this project will be through the Transportation Department.
42. Bike Trails
Source: CGP Fig. IV.12-IV.3, EIR 232, Eastern Coachella Valley Community Plan (ECVP)
Findings of Fact: According to the ECVP, bike trails are to be constructed along Madison Street, 60`h Avenue, and
Monroe Street south of 60`h.
Mitigation: The developer is conditioned to construct the bike trails in accordance with the ECVP during the
i Jementation proposals (tract maps, parcel maps, etc.).
28 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Monitoring: This project will be monitored through the building permit review process.
UTILITY AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project
43. Water
a) Require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or ❑ ❑ ❑
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing ❑ ❑ ❑
entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Source: CGP Fig. IV.14 - IV.15, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The proposed project evaluated in this EA represents modification to adopted Specific Plan No.
218. Project impacts on water utilities were evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and adopted by the County
of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. Approval of Specific Plan No. 218 and certification of EIR
232 required that the project applicant show that adequate water facilities, including water treatment availability,
existed to meet the demands of development. As a result, potential impacts to water facilities for the proposed
project have already been considered and mitigated. Reservoir sites, water sources, pumping plants, and distribution
facilities will be constructed to meet criteria provided by the Coachella Valley Water District.
project evaluated in this EA proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements,
decrease the number of residential units, and increase golf course area within specific Plan No. 218. The proposed
amendment to the Specific Plan would result in fewer residential units at build out, which would decrease the
amount of potable water required to supply domestic uses when compared against that evaluated in EIR 232.
Therefore, the demand for potable water generated by build out of the Specific Plan as currently proposed is less
than that previously evaluated. The expansion of the planned golf course will increase the demand for canal water.
Miti :ration: Potential significant adverse impacts to water treatment and supply systems evaluated by Environmental
Impact Report No. 232 and the Addendum.
Monitoring: Monitoring will be through the building permit review process by the Coachella Valley Water District.
44. Sewer
a) Require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities, ❑ ® ❑ ❑
including septic systems, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of
which would cause significant environmental effects?
b) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may service the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's ❑ ❑ ❑
projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Source: CGP Fig. IV.14, EIR 232
intis o f Fact: The proposed amendment involves the re -arrangement of allowed residential and open space uses
within the development area. While the number of residential units allowed will decrease, the change in the
29 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant wish Significant No
lrnpacl Mitigalion Impact Impact
Incorporated
configuration of planned land uses, the related changes to the circulation system may affect existing and planned
sewer service systems. An update of the information in EIR 232 is required.
Mitigation_ Potential significant adverse impacts to wastewater treatment systems shall be evaluated by the
Addendum Environmental Impact Report (AEIR232) to EIR 232 required for this project, and appropriate
mitigation measures shall be identified.
Monitorin : Monitoring will be through the building permit review process by the Coachella Valley Water District.
45. Solid Waste
a) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ ❑
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
b) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
wastes (including the CIWMP (County Inte ated Waste Management Plan)? ❑ ❑
Source: CGP Fig. IV. 17-IV.18, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: Project impacts on solid waste facilities were evaluated in EIR 232, which was certified and
adopted by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors in October of 1988. The project evaluated in this EA
proposes to amend the Specific Plan in order to modify land use arrangements, decrease the number of residential
-s, and increase golf course area within specific Plan areas. The proposed amendment to the Specific Plan would
result in fewer residential units at build out, which would decrease the amount of solid waste generated at build out.
Moreover, uses within the Specific Plan are affected by solid waste programs and land use standards of the
Comprehensive General Plan. The County Integrated Waste Management Program governs collection, disposal and
recycling 0fSol id waste generated by this project. Solid waste impacts were analyzed and mitigated in El 232, and
will be incrementally reduced to the reduction of units within the Specific Plan area. Thus, no further study is
required.
Mitt ation: Compliance with the measures set forth in EIR 232 and the Addendum:'
Monitoring: Monitoring to be provided by the Building and Safety Department.
46. Utilities
Would the project impact the following facilities requiring or resulting in the construction of new facilities or
the expansion of existing facilities; the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?
a) Electricity?
b) Natural gas? ❑ ® ❑ ❑
c) Communications systems? ❑ ® ❑ ❑
d) Storm water drainage? ❑ ® ❑ ❑
30 EA37465
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
e) Street lighting? O ® ❑ O
f) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ❑ ® O O
g) Other governmental services? ® ❑ ❑
h) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ❑ ® ❑ ❑
Source: CGP Fig. IV.25-IV.26, EIR 232
Findings of Fact: The proposed amendment involves the re -arrangement of allowed residential and open space uses
within the specific plan area. While the number of residential units allowed will decrease, the change in the:'
configuration of planned land uses, the related changes to the circulation system may affect existing and planned
utility service systems. In addition, changes to the planned drainage system are proposed. An update of the
information in EIR 232 is required.
Mitigation: Mitigation for this project will be through the requirements of the relevant utility companies..
Monitoring: This project shall be monitored through the relevant utility companies
OTHER
Other: ❑
Source: N/A
[■E
Findings of Fact_ N/A
Mitigation: N/A
Monitoring: N/A
48. Other: ❑ ❑
Source: N/A
Findings of Fact: N/A
Mitigation: N/A
Monitoring: - N/A
49. Other: ❑ ❑ ❑
rce: N/A
I EA37i65
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Then
Significant with significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Findings of Fact: N/A
Mitigation: N/A
Monitoring: N/A
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
50. Does the project have the potential to substantially 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 0 0
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of
a rare, or endangered plant or animal to eliminate important examples ofthe major
periods of California history or prehistory?
Source: EIR 232 and "Findings of Fact" listed above
Findings of Fact; No sensitive, rare or endangered wildlife and/or vegetation species were identified on the project
site. Those portions remaining in a natural condition are at this time an isolated block of habitat. In addition, no.
cultural resources arg,Jocated on the project site. Thus, the proposed project will not have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment in this regard.
51. Does the proj ect have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals,
to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? (A short-term impact on 0 0
the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time
while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.)
Source: EIR 232 and "Findings of Fact" listed above
Findings of Fact: The project involves modifications to an existing approved Specific Plan. The decrease in the
amount of allowed residential uses will reduce the long -terns impacts of the project.
52. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in 0 0 0
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects as defined in California Code of
Regulations, Section 15130)?
Source: EIR 232 and "Findings of Fact" listed above
Findings of Facts The proposed changes to the project circulation system will require a corresponding amendment
to the General Plan Circulation Element Map. This change may affect existing and planned surrounding land uses.
Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial 0 O
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 13
32 EAJ'»65
Less than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant with Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Source: "Findings of Fact" listed above
Findings of Fact: The proposed changes to the circulation system may create traffic, noise, and emergency service
impacts to existing and planned surrounding land uses.
VI. EARLIER ANALYSES
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. California Code of Regulations, Section 15063
(c) (3) (D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
Earlier Analyses Used, if any: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan
Eastern Coachella Valley Plan
Specific Plan No. 218 and related EIR No. 232
Location Where Earlier Analyses, if used, are available for review: Riverside County Planning Department,
4080 Lemon Street, $' Floor, Riverside, California, 92502-1409
Y:\Ttvl2\Keith\Eas\ea37465pt3.wpd
33 EA37465
Riversiden Cou ty
Waste Management department
Robert A. Nelson. Genera! .blanager-Chiej£ngineer
December 31, 1998
Mirtha Purkhart
Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 91 Floor
P.O. Box 1409
Riverside, CA 92502-1409
RE: Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No. 218 (Coral Mountain Development)
Dear Ms. Purkhart:
The Riverside County Waste Management Department (Department) has reviewed the above -
mentioned project, located southerly of 58' Avenue and just east of the Coral Reef Mountain in the
Coachella Valley. The Department has the following comments at this time:
The original Specific Plan and the associated Environmental Impact Report (EIR) were:,_,_.;
approVad in 1988, prior to the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939).
Therefore, the specific plan project was never evaluated in the context of AB 939, which
addresses the over -reliance on landfills for solid waste disposal by requiring each city and,:
county to divert 50 percent of solid waste from landfills by the year 2000. Waste generation
from new growth could affect the County's capability of meeting the AB 939 mandate.
Moreover, the added waste could impact the County's landfill system by accelerating the
depletion of available landfill space.
2. The project would result in a substantial population growth in the La Quinta area; therefore,
it would generate a significant quantity of solid waste, both during project construction and
after project built -out. In order to reduce the project's impacts on the -County solid waste
management system, the project proponent shall be required to mitigate the project's solid'
waste impacts with the following measures:
a. Demolition and construction waste should be recycled through the use of on -site grinders or
wood recycling facilities.
b. Green waste generated from project landscape areas and the two golf courses should be either
composted on -site or sent to a composting facility in the area for recycling.
C. The use of hazardous materials, such as herbicides, insecticides, and/or chemical fertilizers,
for vegetation in the golf courses and landscape areas within the project may generate
hazardous waste from the unused portions of these materials. Please be advised that County
landfills do not accept hazardous materials. The project should comply with all applicable
1995.11.rrket Street - Rlrerside. CA 92501-1719 - i909t 95 5-13.'0 - Fav (909) 953-1374 - Far (909) 955-1334
r"
law and regulations on hazardous waste storage and disposal.
d. The California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Act of 1991 requires that adequate areas
for collecting and loading recyclable materials be provided in commercial projects, business
areas, multi -family residential projects with five or more units, and detached, single family
residential projects where solid waste is collected and loaded in a location which serves five
or more units. Prior to building permit issuance, the project proponent shall submit three
copies of a site plan for each development phase to the Waste Management Department for
review and approval. The site plan should show the locations and designs for the recyclable
materials storage areas. Design standards for the storage area are as follows:
i. The design, construction and location of recycling areas shall not conflict
with any applicable federal, state or local laws relating to fire, building,
access, transportation, circulation or safety and shall be designed to be
architecturally compatible with affected structures and existing topography;
ii. The recycling storage areas shall be conveniently located at or near solid
waste collection areas, where feasible, but maintain adequate separation,
fencing and landscaping to ensure that adjacent areas are not impacted by any
associated noise, odor, vectors or glare from the storage areas:
The recycling storage areas, bins and containers, shall be adequate in capacity -,
,; number and distribution to achieve fifty per cent recycling of the total waste
generated by the project;
iv. The recycling storage areas shall be sufficiently protected from rain which
might render the collected materials unmarketable and shall be secure from
theft;
V. Collection vehicles and personnel shall have unobstructed access to the
storage area;
vi. All recycling bins shall be labeled with the universal recycling symbol and
with signage indicating to the users the type of material to be deposited in
each bin.
e. Items to be collected for recycling from a residential, commercial or industrial establishment
depend on the types of materials available for recycling and the haulers's collection system.
The project proponent should work with his permitted refuse hauler to identify which
materials may be collected for recycling and on what schedule.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (909) 955-4386.
fAdata\ping\landuse\devrev\ 1998\dr98-302
Sincerely,
S g ey Ma
anner III
4-
78-495 CALLE TAMPICO — LA OUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 — (760) 777-7000
TOD (760) 777-1227
January 19, 1999
Ms. Mirtha Purkhart, Project Planner
Riverside County Planning Department
9th Floor, CAC - P. O. Box 1409
Riverside, CA 92502-1409
FAX AND VIA MAIL
SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN NO.218, AMENDED NO. 1 - EA 37465 - CORAL MOUNTAIN
Dear Ms. Purkhart:
The City of La Quinta has reviewed the above applications and has the following comments:
L As indicated the City of La Quinta's Sphere of Influence includes the property west of
Monroe Street and north of Avenue 60.
2. The City of La Quinta has common boundaries with the proposed project along Avenue 58;
Avenue 60 and Madison Street, and the westerly'project boundary between Avenue 60 and
Avenue 58.
3. The City of La Quinta has designated as Primary Arterials the following streets: Monroe
Street between Avenue 52 and Avenue 64; Madison Street between Avenue 60 and Avenue
54; Avenue 62 between Monroe Street and Jefferson Street extended; Avenue 60 between
Monroe Street and the centerline of Section 28. As Primary Arterials the cross section calls
for 100 to 110 foot right of way.
4. The City of La Quinta approved a project south and west of the intersection of Avenue 60
and Madison Street called "Travertine". This project is a major development within the City
and as such, adequate access to the project must be maintained. Madison Street is a major
access to the project and should be design as an Arterial street with a width of 110 feet.
5. The proposed layout of Madison Street and Avenue 60 does not take into consideration
adequate access to the Travertine project in that, part of Madison Street does not appear on
the plan and it also appears that the redesigned Madison Street, south of the course, does not
have the right of way width for an Arterial Street
r �
MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA. CALIFORNIA 92253
6. The City of La Quinta's General Plan identifies an Equestrian Trail on Avenue 58 west of
Madison Street. This project should take this into consideration.
7. Please provide a copy of the Addendum to the EIR and Specific Plan.
In summary, the City of La Quinta is opposed to the reconfiguration of Madison Street and Avenue
60 as depicted in the Land Use Plan for Coral Mountain unless: 1) The new alignment includes all
of Madison Street to Avenue 62 and is developed as an Arterial street (110-feet) per City standards;
and 2) the redesign of Madison Street where it "T's" into the curved realignment of Madison Street
into Avenue 60 needs to be modified to provide a 1,200 foot radius curve, or more. We would
request the applicant redesign to conform with La Quinta's Circulation Element.
Very truly yours,
i
RRY HERMAN
Community Development Director
JH:bjs
_�.�E� UNIRIEO 8„
re3ACFiELLA VALLEY UNIFIED Z%-H%0%AL DISTRICT
POST OFFICE BOX 847 / THERMAL, CA 92274 / (619) 399-5137
Hou HVE
January 19. 1999 JAN 251999
OD
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Riverside County Planning Department PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Land Development Committee
Ms. Mirtha Purkhart, Project Planner
9th Floor, CAC - P.O. Box 1409
Riverside, CA 92502-1409
Re: Amendment 1 to Specific Plan No. 218 for Coral Mountain Project
Dear Ms. Purkhart:
This later is submitted to the Riverside County Planning Department ("RCPD") on
behalf of the Coachella Valley Unified School District ("District") relative to the above -
referenced project. We have reviewed the draft of Amendment 1 to Specific Plan No. 21,8
("Amendment") for the Coral Mountain Project ("Project") and submit these comments to
identify the significant adverse impacts of the Amendment on the District's school facilities
("School Facilities").
1. Request for Notice
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21092.2, we hereby request that you send
copies of all notices and other documents regarding the Project that are mailed or distributed
by the RCPD to the District at its office, located at 87-225 Church Street, -Thermal, CA 92274,
attention Dr. Colleen Gaynes, Superintendent. We also request that you send a copy of those
notices or other documents to Mr. Alex Bowie, Bowie, Arneson, Wiles & Giannone, at 4920
Campus Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660. If any fee or charge is required for the provision
of such notices or documents, please provide them office with an invoice for such costs. This
Request for Notice specifically includes, but is not limited to: (i) notices of all hearings; (ii)
notices of all proposed actions to be taken with regard to the developmental process;
Ms. Mirtha Purkhart, Project Planner
January 19, 1999
Page 2
(iii) all requests for information; (iv) draft and final environmental documents for the Project
that are prepared, furnished, or filed pursuant to CEQA (including the Draft EIR, any updates
to the Draft EIR, responses to the Draft EIR updates and staff reports and commentaries
related thereto, and any Final EIR); and (v) copies of all Planning Commission, Board of
Supervisors, or other agenda that calendar any matter related to the Project.
2. Project InkrMation
The proposed development of the Project includes the construction of 3,500 residential
dwelling units ("DU") on a total of approximately 1,280 acres of property within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the County of Riverside ("County") and within the Lower Coachella
Valley Land Use Planning Area. The DU are planned to consist of the following densities: (i)
796 of medium density; (ii) 1,377 of medium high density, (iii) 721 of high density; and 486 of
very high density. The Project is located within the District's boundaries and is within its
respective attendance areas.
As wE understand the proposal, of the total 1,280 acres encompassed within the Project,
395 acres are planned to be used for two golf courses, 30 acres are planned to be used for parks, 7
acres are planned to be used for community facilities and 10 acres are planned to be used for an
elementary school. The elementary school is projected to be located within the very high density
residential portion of the Project. Comments as to the acceptability of this location for a school
site will be submitted at a later date.
3. Impact on the District's School Facilities
Construction of 3,500 residential DU pursuant to the Amendment will have a significant
adverse impact on the District's School Facilities. Based on the District's present estimated
average student generation rate ("SGR") of 1.24 pursuant to the previous Mitigation Study
Appraisal by the County prepared by School Planning Services, entitled "Development Fee
Justification Analyses for Residential Development, CommerciaVIndustrial Development and
Senior Housing" ("SPS Report"), development of the Project will result in a total of 4,340
students [3,500 x 1.24]. The District currently does not have sufficient permanent school
facilities to house these 4,340 students generated from the development of the Project. Based on
the District's School Facilities construction costs of $13,187 per student, the adverse impact
resulting from development of the Project amounts to approximately $57,231,580 [4,340
students x $13,187]. Further assuming that the average square footage of a proposed residential
DU for this Project is 1,135 square feet, school fees presently required to be paid pursuant to
Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995 will offset the foregoing
amount by approximately $7,666,925 [3,500 DU x 1,135 square feet x $1.93 per square foot].
Ms. Mirtha Purkhart, Project Planner
January 19, 1999
Page 3
Although these numbers are estimates, the potential adverse impact on the District's School
Facilities as a result of the development of the Project approximates $49,564,655.
4. Proposed Mitigation of the District's School Facilities Im acts
Because the development of the Project as proposed by the Amendment will have
significant adverse impacts on the District's School Facilities, further analysis in the form of a
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ("Supplemental EIR") will be required absent an
agreement between the District and the developer of the Project that will mitigate those impacts
to a level of insignificance ("Mitigation Agreement"). The Mitigation Agreement would be
based on payments ("Mitigation Payments"), to be paid prior to the issuance of building permits,
of $3.84 per square foot of assessable space ("Assessable Space") as defined in Government
Code Section 65995, for each DU, up to a maximum per DU ("DU Maximum Payment") of
$7,983. This amount is estimated to be $15,254,400 [3500 DU x 1,135 square feet x $3.84 per
square foot], or, approximately 27% of the impact of $57,231,580. The Mitigation Payments and
DU Maximum Payments would be adjusted by the District annually, beginning January 1, 2000
by the change in the Marshall & Swift Class D Wood Frame Construction Cost Index ("Index")
since January 1, 1999. The Mitigation Agreement would also provide credits from State Funding
and any subsequent authorized general obligation bond funding.
In the event that the Mitigation Agreement is not executed, the developer of the Project
will be required to pay the District, under present requirements, statutory school fees of at least
$7,666,925 pursuant to Section 17620 of the Education Code and Section 65995 of the
Government Code. However, the Project most likely will be subject to Alternative School fees
pursuant to Section 17620 of the Education Code and Sections 65995.5 and 65995.7 of the
Government Code. The amount of these Alternative School Fees has not yet been determined,
but is estimated to be 50% of the School Facilities cost pursuant to Section 65995.5 and 100% of
School Facilities costs pursuant to Section 65996.7. In relation to this Projec-t,-50% of the
estimated School Facilities costs amounts to $28,615,790 and the 100% amount is estimated to
be $57,231,580. However, execution of a Mitigation Agreement with the District would appear
to be in the best interests of the owner of the Property.
5. Conclusion
Due to the potential significant impacts on the District's School Facilities resulting from
the development of the Project, the District respectfully requests that the RCPD require the
preparation of a Supplemental EIR as part of the approval process for this Amendment.
However, we believe that the preparation of a Supplemental EIR would not be required should
the District and the developer of the Project mutually agree to enter into a Mitigation Agreement
to reduce the significant impacts to a level of insignificance.
Ms. Mirtha Purkhart, Project Planner
January 19, 1999
Page 4
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this Project, and, because the Project is in,
its early stages, we reserve the right to comment at a future date.
Very truly yours,
Ken Miller
Director of Facilities
I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
9THFLOOR, CAC - P.O. BOX 1409
RIVERSIDE, CA 92502 -1409
DATE: January 5, 1999
TO: Transportation - Russ Garrett
Transportation - George Sterriker
Environmental Health - Don Park
Environmental Health - John Silva
Fire Department - Nick Cadena
Building & Safety - Grading Section
Regional Parks & Open Space - Mark Brewer
County Geologist
Waste Management - R. Nelson
Supervisor Wilson (2)
Commissioner Porras
EDA - Brad Hudson
CSA #152 - Mel Bohlken
City of La Quinta - Planning
City of Coachella - Planning and Development
City of Indio - Planning and Development
FROM: Keith Gardner. Planner
RE: • Specific Plan #218A1
Coachella Valley Water District
Southern California Edison
Southern California Gas
General Telephone
Coachella Valley Unified School District
Desert Sands Unified School District
California Department of Fish & Game
CALTRANS all
Coachella Valley Assoc. of Governments
Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District
Southern Coachella Valley Community Serv. Dist.
Planning, Indio - Paul Clark
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 218, AMMENDED NO. 1 -
EA37465 - Coral Mountain Development, LLC -
Lower Coachella Valley Zoning District - Fourth
Supervisorial District - Southerly of 58" Ave,
Westerly of Jackson St. 1,280 Acres - SP Zone -
REQUEST: Amendment to SP 218 -
APN: 761-110-001
Since the last transmittal, we have received this Screen Check # l . Please keep this for your records, and send back
any comments deemed necessary.
Should you have any questions, please call Keith Gardner at (909) 933-M2 or Richard MacHott at (909) 955-3299.
COMMENTS: Per the Coachella Valley Recreation & Park District Master Plan, Ordinance
# 460 allows agencies that provide park and recreation services to mitigate the impact
of land subdivisions by accepting developed parks, payment of fees in lieu thereof, or
a combination of both for park and recreation purposes. Prior to the recordation of
the final map, the land divider shall submit to the Planning Director an agreement with
the Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District which demonstrates to the satisfactio-
DATE: February 9, 1999 SIGNATURE:
PLEASE PRINT NAME AND TITLE: Don Martin, General Manager
TELEPHONE: 760-34 7-3484 &,t, 0#/M*00,
If you do not use this letter for you response, please indicate the project planner's name. Thank you.
of the County that the land divider has provided for the payment of $660.45 per
dwelling unit in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance # 460.
• w ATFR
ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY
�ISTRIC1
GOACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (760) 398.2651
DIRECTORS OFFICERS
TELLIS CODEKAS, PRESIDENT THOMAS E. LEVY, GENERAL MANAGER -CHIEF ENGINEER
;NEW Mc AHARA, VICE PRESIDENT June 14, 1999 OWEN MLCOOK. ABERSSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER
JOHN P. POWELL, Jr. AEDWINE AND SHERRILL. ATTORNEYS
DOROTHY M. NICHOLS
Richard Machott
County of Riverside Planning Department
Post Office Box 1409
Riverside, California 92502
Dear Mr. Machott:
ii
Subject: Coral Mountain Specific Plan 218
Amendedreen
-Check No. 2
File: 0126.1
0163.1
We have reviewed screen check No. 2 for Specific Plan 218. We appreciate the opportunity
to review this important document.
Our comments regarding the first draft (Screen Check No. 1) have been addressed to our
satisfaction and have been incorporated into the current document. We do however have one
comment on the current document. This comment can be found in the enclosed
Attachment A.
If you have any questions please call Joe Cook, planning engineer, extension 292.
Yours very truly,
J&111_10,,.r.C51
Tom Levy
General Manager -Chief Engineer
Enclosure/l/as
JEC:rmc\eng\sw\jun\machoa TRUE CONSERVATION
USE WATER WISELY
Attachment A
Page IV-14, under the heading Water and Sewer Plan to address the following:
The third and fourth sentence reads,"The CVWD provides three types of water service
within the Coachella Valley - domestic water, reclaimed water and agricultural or
irrigation water. Both types of water service are supplied by wells." This sentence is
incorrect.
The district provides domestic water from wells. Agricultural water used for
irrigation is a surface water source.
0
JEC:rmc\eng\sw\j un\machott
March 31, 2000
Kim Jarrell Johnson
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
Regional Park And Open Space District
P.O. Box 3507
Riverside, CA 92519-3507
RE: Coral Mountain at La Quinta/Park District Condition
Dear Ms. Johnson:
Thank you for meeting with Susan Stoltenberg and me on March 22 concerning your
department's conditions of approval for the referenced project. As I stated in our meeting, Coral
Mountain supports the concept of regional trails. Regional trails are of benefit to existing and
future generations and meet a need for recreation as urbanization occurs. That said, however, we
do have some concern with the wording of your condition. It is proposed that Coral Mountain
provide easements outside of the public right-of-way along three major streets (including
acquisition of off -site area), construct trails to county standards and maintain there in perpetuity
(with associated legal liability issues). These are, as the name implies, regional trails. In other
words. they are a regional improvement of area -wide benefit, not solely to the Coral Mountain
project. Therefore, a nexus issue is raised. While we acknowledge a responsibility to participate
in the regional trail obligation at a level commensurate with our project's impact, we must
express our reservations at being burdened with land, financial and maintenance responsibilities
arguably beyond our fair share.
To add to our concern, it was our impression from our meeting that Coral Mountain would not
receive any credits toward its park acreage requirements or in -lieu fees in exchange for granting
easements or constructing and maintaining regional trails. We will still be required, however, to
mitigate the park requirements of the Coachella Valley Park and Recreation District by either
providing land per the standards, paying in -lieu fees of $660 per dwelling unit, or a combination
of both. We feel this puts us in a disadvantaged situation compared to other projects.
Accordingly, we would like to propose alternative language for a condition that we feel
accomplishes the County's goal but also recognizes the nexus between Coral Mountain and the
obligation to participate in the regional trails program. This condition is attached for your
consideration.
Sincerely,
CORAL MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT, LLC
John P. Gamlin
S.V.P.. Planning & Development
[Proposed Condition Language]
Regional trails, as depicted in the County of Riverside Comprehensive General Plan in
effect at the time of approval of the Specific Plan Amendment, shall be constructed
concurrent with the construction of rights -of -way abutting the property as required by the
Transportation Department:
• Along the east side of Madison Street abutting the subject property.
• Along the south side of 601h Avenue from the Madison Street intersection to the
southeastern corner of the subject property east of Monroe Street.
The width of the regional trails shall be per county standards. The project shall dedicate
the area required for the regional trails parallel to the adjacent public rights -of way. A
reduction in the amount of dedication required shall be allowed for any efficiencies
inherent in combining the regional trails with similar use areas within the public right-of-
way, such as the sidewalk and a Class I bike trail, if required. An encroachment permit
shall be granted for the construction of regional trails within the rights -of -way.
In consideration of the dedication of land and construction of regional trails, the project
shall receive credit against the Regional Parkland Fee portion of the Public Facilities and
Services Mitigation Fee.
In the event a County Maintenance District (or other similar public district) is formed or
adopted to maintain regional trails, the Coral Mountain regional trails will be eligible for
annexation into the County's Maintenance District. Maintenance for all regional trails
shall be the responsibility of a County Open Space/Trails Maintenance District, if
formed. In the event no district is formed, then these responsibilities shall be assumed by
the appropriate Coral Mountain homeowner's association.
MR
zy-08-00 09:39A County Park District gog-955-4305 P-01
RIVERSIDE COUNTY 6*
Regional Park And Open -Space District s
Phone► � -
4600 Creatmore Road a Riverside, CA 925004J8r58 • (909) 9.55.4.310
Fnx (900) 955.4505
PAUL FRANDSEN
General Manager
April 6, 2000
Jahn P. Gamlin
Coral Mountain Development
41-865 Boardwalk, Suite I I I
Palm Desert, CA 92211
Dear Mr. Gamlin,
This is in response to your letter or March 21, 2000 concerning trail~ in the Coral
Mountain Specific Plain. In the following discussion, the language in italics are direct
quotes from your letter.
.., they are a regional improvement of area -wide benefit, not solely to the Coral Mountain
projeC4.
The trails that this project has been conditioned to provide are called regional trails.
r Iiowever, realistically, these trails will be most frequently utilized by residents of your
project.
While we acknowledge a responsihility to participcaie in the regional trail obligation at a
level commensurate with our projects impact, we trust express our reservations dt being
burdened with land financial, and maintenance re,crnazTibilities arguably beyond tour fair
share.
According to the project summery included in the vec;ific plan this project includes 129.0
acres stretching across five differcmt sections of land, approximately 3500 housing units,
multiple golf courses, a commercial component, a park and a school. It N obvious that
this is a large development" which will have not just local but also regional irnpuuts. It
seems reasonable that a prtsject or this si7c provide some rc:cn-ational amenities That
would he of regional bencfft. The cost ortrail maintenance should be born by whatever
entity will he maintaining this project's roadside landscaping, This could be a
homeowner's association or a landscape maintenance district and we will condition as
such.
.,.it was our impression... that (" oral ll-loa.lniuin would not receive any credits toti-,ard its
Park acreage requirements or In -lieu fc}es in exchange for gran ing easements or
constructing and muintuining lrcait . We will still he required... to mitigate the park
reguirementx ref the Coachella Valley Park and Recreation District by either providing
land. - - paving fee.y ... or a combination of both.
wnt •,.quire pIVICLI, devr1W, tnanalc and tnrervrr[ for the :nsD:rntion. ore enJ of all people
a-ell•LalanceJ system of area of ouutandsaii, scenic, recreation. +nd hialnr,r tmpurtaiku,
May,708-00 09:39A County Park District gog-955-4306
P,v2
The .fees or land provided to the Coachella Park and Recreation District under the
Quimby act are to mitigate the impacts of the project on local parks. The Coachella Park
and Recreation District provides for the local or community recreation needs of its
citimns. It is the County Park District that is empowered to provide for the regional park
needs 1'or Riverside County. No part of any fee that is paid to Coachella Valley is given
to the County. No further fee for park needs is required of this project outside of the
Quimby fee paid to the Coachella District.
Sine cly,
rr i r
'mm Ja rell oltnson
Assistant Park Planner
c: Marc Brewer
rr
LAND DEVELOPMENT CONIMTTEE
(*INITIAL CASE ACCEPTANCE) MEETING AGENDA
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
9TH FLOOR, CAC - P.O. Box 1409
Riverside, CA 92502-1409
)ATE: December 18, 1998
'O: Transportation - Russ Garrett
LT.*ansportation - George Sterriker
LEdVironmental Health - Don Park
Environmental Health - John Silver
Fire Department - Nick Cadena
Building & Safety - Grading Section
Regional Parks & Open Space - Mark Brewer
County Geologist
Waste Management - R. Nelson
Supervisor Wilson (2)
Commissioner Porras
EDA - Brad Hudson
CSA #152 - Mel Bohlken
City of La Quinta - Planning
City of Coachella - Planning and Dev.
City of Indio - Planning and Dev.
Coachella Valley Water District
Southern California Edison
Southern California Gas
General Telephone
Coachella Valley Unified School District
Desert Sands Unified School District
California Department of Fish and Game
CALTRANS # 11
Coachella Valley Assoc. Of Governments
Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District
Southern Coachella Valley Community Serv. Dist.
Planning, Indio - Paul Clark
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 218, AMENDED NO. 1 - EA
37465 - Coral Mountain Development, LLC - Lower
Coachella Valley Zoning District - Fourth Supervisorial
District - Southerly of 58th Ave, westerly of Jackson St
1,280 Acres - SP Zone - REQUEST:'Amendment to
SP 218 - APN: 761-110-001
Please review the case described above, along with the attached tentative map/exhibit. This item will be discussed c
JANUARY 6,1999, by the Land Development Committee in Indio. All County LDC Agencies and Departments, plea:
have draft conditions in the Sierra System by the LDC date. If you cannot clear the exhibit, please have LDC correctioi
in the system and DENY the routing. Once the route is complete, and the approval screen is approved with or witho
-orrections, the case can be scheduled for a public hearing. All other agencies, please have your comments/conditions
the Planning Department as soon as possible, but no later than 14 days after --the LDC date. Your comment
recommendations/conditions are requested so that it may be included in the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact MIRTHA PURKHART, Proje
Planner, at (909) 955-1852.
COMMENTS:
DA'r:.: SIGNATURE:
PL. _-5E PRINT NAME AND TITLE:
TELEPHONE:
If you do not use this letter for your response,
please indicate the project planner's name. Thank you.
DESERT CONTRACTORS'.
ASSOCIATION
March 17, 2000
Honorable Chairman & Planning Commissioners
Riverside County Planning Commission
c/o Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
Riverside CA 92501
Attn: Keith Gardner
RE: Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No. 218/ "Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty and Planning Commissioners:
It is our understanding that the Planning Commission is considering the referenced application at
its hearing on April 12, 2000. As local residents of the Coachella Valley and an a strong
representative of the business community and construction industry, We wish to express our
support for Coral Mountain. As a project that has been on the drawing boards for the last l l
years, we are confident that Coral Mountain will be a well -conceived and welcomed addition to
the area. _ -
We strongly urge the Commission to recommend approval of the Amendment to the Board of
Supervisors. Thank you for your kind consideration.
Sincerely,
CA Boar
Jennifer Schmitt
DCA Executive Director
P
1<
IN
BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT INC.
March 22, 2000
Honorable Chairman and Planning Commissioners
Riverside County Planning Commission
c/o Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Sticet. 91h Flour
Riverside, CA 92501
Attn: Keith Gardner
Re: Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No. 218 / "Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty and Planning Commissioners:
.•
It is our understanding that the Planning Commission is considering the referenced
application at its hearing on April 12.2000. We are the principals in "Lions Gate". a
subdivision of estate homes and lots bordering the proposed Coral Mountain to the north
on Avenue 58. We also own undeveloped acreage bordering the proposed Coral
Mountain to the northwest also on Avenue 58.
Having substantial holdings in this area and a good knowledge of the proposed project We
strongly urge the Commission to approve this Amendment to the Board of Supervisors.
We see Coral Mountain as a development well suited and matched for this area and it
should be a benefit to all residents and interests in its vicinity. N[uch effort and thought
has gone into planning Coral Mountain and we look forward to it beeoitTing reality.
Sincerely,
, dohn J. Gogian, Jr.
Neil W. Kleine
41910 Boardwalk. Suite A-10 • Palm Desert California 92211 • (760) 776-4840 • Fax. (760) 776-4842 • CA. # 390365 • AZ # 141156
MitCH Z4, 2M
lfUh URADLE CHAIRXIN & PLANN LNG tb:NM1yUANFRS
RIvT.Rxmir. COUNTY ?LAANjN(;CU,%(MW0N
VO RrURSME C'O C'XTy Pf AA?V ihr DFTa RI1MTr
sues LL 4Q,'4 STREET. fT$ FLOOR
A r "MIDE. CA 9Lw4
'krr: JaIT)f C.UWNM
RT: AMEKDW LN'r Nu.1 Y'U S PECMC PL. N XO. 211u C0RAL M0LWTAIN
DEAR rRA I"IA1N PK7W AN MxXXMG COMMLSSN)NERS
IT IS alit tf"LRSTANnrNf-r TfUT THE e[a-iN-WC CC0-_7MZS1UN CONSIDERING
THE RU'EMNR:XP-krMCATION AT M MAR MG ON APRTI.1i_ ZWO.
A9 OWYT. ; OF THE LA, QUWTA AND CI 116H OILS TK THE rlkWE -j A3tLA
WE WISH TO F-XPRESS DIIR 9UlP03tT MR COILa M ou.,NTa.IN.
'S'L INI DERSIAM) TITAT TRf. PROJECT WAS ORYc4Nj LL-, .%VVXL0 k ll 11
YEARS .ILW A N.I) IN RE.'LDY TO BEGLN. TILERS ARE hL$"NY BE', ERTS TO TIE
COMMILWr Y OV I'I.At17iTTff'r k rW)r MT1• QF IIi1.1 N LIC.
WE STk0NCr.y UxtGE raS CoprH SSZON rU RkILUrI.Al1 ND APPROVAL Or TM
AMENDMENT TO THE BOARD OF 5"Mlv'L,nR.S.
TR,ti Ky" roe VOUR KL.ND CONSIDERATION.
NNICYnny
MUMAIMAD REL1 CRODS GiLUAR IIEDAYATI
OWNERS OT 80505. WM 9TRFFT. LA QT.'INTA. RrwER.SIDIE
March 27, 2000
Honorable Chairman & Planning Commissioners
Riverside County Planning Commission
c/o Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9 th Floor
Riverside, Ca. 92501
Attention: Keith Gardner
RE: Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No. 218/ "Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty and Planning Commissioners:
It has come to our attention that the Planning Commission
is considering the refferenced application at the Hearing
on April 12, 2000. We as land holding neighbors in the
area (So.East corner Madison and 58th Ave.) wish to give
our support for Coral Mountain Project. It would be a great
benefit for this area.
It;- is our hope and strong support that the Amendment, be alo"
ed by the Board of Supervisors.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
l -- 'r—E
Arthur M. Kazarian
LAUREI`IC,4
March 31, 2000
Honorable Chairman & Planning Commissioners
Riverside County Planning Commission
C/O Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street 9" Floor
Riverside, Ca 92501
Att: Keith Gardner
It a
XTJ ' 7, b
APR 12 20pp
+°� ! CWM
�MEPV"f
RE: Amendment Nio .1 to specific Plan No. 218/ "Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty and Planning Commissioners:
It is our understanding that the Planning Commission is considering the referenced
application at its hearing on April 12, 2000. As residents of the Coachella Valley and
members of the business community, we wish to express our support for Coral ilountairt.
As a project that has been on the drawing boards for the past 11 years, we are confident
that Coral Mountain will be a «yell -conceived and welcomed addition to the area.
We strongly urge the Commission to recommend approval of the Amendment to the
Board of Supervisors. Thank you for your kind consideration.
Sincerely,
Mark A. Couch, Sr.
ITEM 4.1
JAM ES FRANCO CONSTRUCTION
77-955 CALLS TAMPICO, SUITE B
LA QUINTA, CA 92253
PHONE (760) 771-0398
FAX (760) 771-3198
March 31, 2000
Honorable Chairman & Planning Commissioners
Riverside County Planning Commission
c/o Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
Attn.: Keith Gardner
RE: Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No. 218/ "Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty and Planning Commissioners:
It is our understanding that the Planning Commission is considering the referenced
application at its hearing on April 12, 2000. As residents of the Coachella Valley and
members of the business community. we wish to express our support for Coral Mountain.
As a project that has been on the drawing boards for the past 11 years, we are confident
that Coral Mountain will be a well -conceived and welcomed addition to the area.
We strongly urge the Commission to recommend approval of the Amendment to the
Board of Supervisors. Thank you for your kind consideration.
f
MES FRANCO - OWNER
HIES FRANCO CONSTRUCTION
ITEM,46 ,
L
ui�c�e[�sonstr�ctivn ....
April 3, 2000
Honorable Chairman & Planning Commissioners
Riverside County Planning Commission
c/o Riverside Cnunty Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9`h Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
Attn: Keith Gardner
RE: Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No. 218/"Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty and Planning Commissioners:
It is our understanding that the Planning Commission is considering the referenced
application at its hearing on April 12, 2000. As residents of the Coachella Valley and,
members of the business community. we wish to express our support for Coral Mountain.
As a project that has been on the drawing boards for the past 11 years, we are confident
that Coral Mountain will be a well -conceived and welcomed addition to the area.
We strongly urge the Commission to recommend approval of the Amendment to the
Board of Supervisors. Thank you for your kind consideration.
Sincerely.
Todd Tidwell.
President
39-205 Leopard Street • Parr-, Desert. CA 922 11-1134 o Ph: (760) 772-2544 • Fax: (760) 772-2540
Eileen M. Sheehy
73-851 Ocotillo Court
Palm Desert, CA 92260
760-340-1396
April 4, 2000
Honorable Chairman & Planning Commissioners
Riverside County Planning Commission
C/o Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9`b Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
ATTN: Keith Gardner
RE: Amendment No.1 to Specific Plan No. 218 "Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty and Planning Commissioners:
I understand that the Planning Commission will be hearing the Coral Mountain
Amendment on April 12, 2000. As a 33-year resident of the Coachella Valley and a
member of the business community, I wish to express my support for Coral Mountain.
Over the years, I have watched our Valley grow, and I am always concerned with the
quality of this growth. I consider Coral Mountain to be environmentally well conceived
and I urge the Commission to recommend approval of the Amendment to the Board of
Supervisors.
Thank you for your kind consideration.
Sincerely,
en M. Sheehy
ITLt4$.,,
Building Empires"
`One Yard At A Time"
ARCHULETA Concrete Constructic
Company
79-607 Country Club Dr. Surte 1
Bermuda Dunes, Calif, 92201
Phone (760) 345-8722
FaX (760) 345-8223
Archuleta.Concrete construction
April 4, 2000
Honorable Chairman & Planning Commissioners
Riverside County Planning Commission
c/o Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9' Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
Att: Keith Gardner
RE: Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No. 218/ "Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty Planning Commissioners:
It is our understanding that the Planning Commission is considering w "referenced
Application at its hearing on April 12, 2000. As residents of the Coachella Valley and
Member of the business community, we wish to express our support for Coral Mountain.
As a project that has been on the drawing boards for the past 11 years, we are
confident that Coral Mountain will be a well -conceived and welcomed additoin to the
area.
We strongly urge the Commission to recommend approval of the Amendment to the
Board of Supervisors. Thank you for your Kind consideration.
Sincerely,
�Jvan J, Aleman
�F
April 5, 2000
Honorable Chairman & Planning Commissioners
Attention: Keith Gardner
Riverside County Planning Commission
C/o Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 0 Floor
Riverside CA 92501
Re: Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No. 218P'Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty and Planning Commissioners:
It is my understanding that the Planning Commission is reviewing the referenced
application at its hearing on April 12, 2000. As a permanent resident of the Coachella
Valley for the last 19 years and a member of the business community, I wish to express
my support for Coral Mountain. This project has been on the drawing boards for the past
11 years and I am confident that Coral Mountain will be a well -planned and positive
addition to the area.
I strongly urge the Commission to recommend approval of the Amendment to the Board
of Supervisors. Thank you for your kind consideration.
,Sincerely, _ -
i
t
Marty Vistica
Nineteen Year Resident
Of the Coachella Valley
WHITEWATER ROCK & SUPPLY Co.
QUARRY STONE - MASONRY SUPPLIES
April 7, 2000
Honorable Chairman & Planning Commissioners
Riverside County Planning Commission
C/o Riverside County Planning Department
Attention: Keith Gardner
4080 Lemon Street, 9d' Floor
Riverside, CA 92501
RE: Amendment No. I to Specific Plan No. 218 "Coral Mountain"
Dear Chairman Petty and Planning Commissioners:
We understand that on April 12, 2000 the Planning Commission is considering the above
matter at its hearing. As residents and business owners in the Coachella Valley, we are
expressing our support for Coral Mountain. This project has been on the drawing board for
many years and we feel that Coral Mountain would be a welcomed addition the the area.
We strongly urge the Commission to approve the Amendment to the Board of Supervisors.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Al Bankus
President
Qo�,� 58645 OLD HIGHWAY 60. WHITEWATER. CALIFORNIA 92282 ���Rs
PHONE PALM SPRINGS (760) 325-2747 FAX (760) 325-3666
e-mail- WWROCKCO@aol.com web site: www.whitewater-rock.ccm
�.;. .+r,e-• -..e.eo oo:fd7 PMVJWS RANCHES
750 31073-44
*N./
.ENUS RANCHES, INC.
P.O. BOX 1179
INDIO. CALIFORNIA 92202
760 (J* 347.3579
April 10, 2000
Riverside County Planning Commission
C/o Keith Gardner. Associate Planner
4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
Riverside, Calif. 92501
RE: Specific Plan No. 218 Amendment No. 1 (Coral mountain)
Dear Planning Commissioners:
We are the owners of 200 acres on the northwest corner of Avenue 60
and Monroe Street in the Thermal area immediately west of, and
adjacent to, the proposed Coral Mountain project. we have had the
land in date production for many decades. operating as Venus
Ranches. Inc. we undersCand that the developers of Coral Mountain
are proposing to amend"mhe specific plan approved by the courty`in
1988 a!nd that the Planning Commission is considering the proposal
at its hearing on April 12. we would lice to express our support
for the project as a next door neighbor. The area in the :vicinity
of our property is in a transition from vacant and agricultural
users to development such as PGA west to the north. we feel that
Coral Mountain. which has been planned for many years, will be a
Positive addition tc the area. Therefore, we urge approval of the
amendment and thank you for thin opportunity to provide input.
Sincerely,
Brad Nussbaum
President
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
TRANSPORTATION AND LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCY
TO:
❑ Office of Planning and Research (OPR)
1400 Tenth Street. Room 121
Sacramento, CA 95814
® County Clerk
County of Riverside
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
FROM:
Riverside County Planning Department
® 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
P. O. Box 1409
Riverside. CA 92502-1409
❑ 82-675 Highway 111, 21 Floor
Indio. CA 92201
Riverside County Transportation Department
❑ 4080 Lemon Street, 8th Floor
P. O. Box 1090
Riverside. CA 92502-1090
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in Compliance with Section 21152 of the California Public Resources Code.
,.A_Number. 37465 Specific Plan No. 218 Amendment -No I/Chance of Zone No. 6454
Project Title: Case Numbers
87071302 Keith Gardner
State Clearinghouse Number Contact Person
909 955-9076
Area Code&o./Ert.
Coral Mountain Develo meat. LLC. 41-865 Boardwalk. Ste. I I I. Palm Desert CA 92211
Project Applicant/Property Owner and Address
Located north of62' Street. Wttriy of Jefferson Street and westerly of Jackson Street
Project Location
Tc, Jify- land uses to decrease maximum number of residnetial units allowed/change name from Rancho La Ouinta to Cota1 Mountain/textual chanee in
SpScific Plan zoning ordinance that would add Planning Areas 14 throuLTh, 53 to Specific Plan Zoning Ordinance and redefine Planning Areas I throush 13.
Project Description
This is to advise that the Riverside County Planning Commission has approved the above -referenced project on Aril 26.236.3000, and has made the following
determinations regarding that project:
I. The project ❑ will. ® will not have a significant effect on the environment.
2. ® An Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 232 was prepared for this project and certified pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
❑ A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act.
❑ The proposed project is a (commercial/industrial/residential) project undertaken pursuant to and in confonuizkto Specific Plan No. ''' (??) for which
an Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. ??) has been prepared. therefore pursuant to Section 15182 of the CEQA Guidelines. the proposed project is
exempt from CEQA.
3. Mitigation Measures 0 were. ❑ were not made a condition of the approval of the project.
4. Findings were made in accordance with Section 21081 of the California Public Resources Code.
5. A statement of Overriding Considerations ❑ , was. N was not adopted for this project.
6. A de minimis finding ❑ was. ® was not made for this project in accordance with Section 711.4 of the California Fish and Game Code.
This is to certify that the Addendum to EIR NO. 2 32.. with comments. responses and record of project approval is available to the general public at:
® Riverside County Planning Department. 4080 Lemon Street. 9th Floor. Riverside. CA 92501
❑ Riverside County Planning Department. 82-675 Highway 111. Room 209. Indio. CA 92201
❑ Riverside County Transportation Department. 4080 Lemon Street. 9th Floor, Riverside. CA 92501
Signature
Title
)BE COMPLETED BY OPR FOR COUNTY CLERK'S USE ONLY
Date Received for Filing and
Posting at OPR:
Date
Please charge deposit fee case A EA #37465
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
INTENT TO CERTIFY AN ADDENDUM Tand
OME ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REP
_ ORT
JBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING CON IISSION
consider the project shown below: to
SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 218, AMENDMENT NO. 1, CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 6464, EA 37465/EIR 232, is an
application submitted by Coral Mountain Development, LLC for property located in the Fourth Supervisorial District,
Lower Coachella Valley Zoning District, and generally located south of 58`h Street, north of 62' Avenue, along designate Madison
and Monroe Street; and, pursuant to Ordinance No. 348, Riverside County Land Use Ordinance, proposes to
1,280 +/- acres into 738 acres of residential uses. 371 acres of gold courses, 9 acres of commercial, 42 acres of parks and
find appropriate. (Legislative) -of--way; Proposes to
trails, 2 acres of community facilities, 10 acres of school site, and 108 acres of transportation rights
change the zone from SP to SP (textual change is SP ordinance); or other such zones that the Planning Commission may
fi
TIME OF HEARING' 10:30 a.m., or as soon as possible thereafter.
DATE OF HEARING: APRIL 12, 2000
PLACE OF HEARING: CITY OF PALM DESERT COUNCIL CHAMBERS
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CA 92260
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING THIS PROJECT, PLEASE CONTACT UITH GARDNER,
PROJECT PLANNER, AT (909) 955-9076.
T!,- Riverside County Plarring Department has determined that the above named project may have a significant
et. .on the environment, and has recommended the certification of an addendum to Environmental Impact Report.
The Planning Commission will consider the proposed project and the addendum to the Environmental Impact Report
at the public hearing.
The case file for the proposed project, and the proposed addendum to the Environmental Impact Report, may be
viewed Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Riverside County Planning Department located
at the address below. Any person wishing to comment on the proposed project, or the addendum to the
Environmental Impact Report, may do so in writing between the date of'this notice and the public hearing; or, may
appear and be heard at the time and place noted above.. All comments received prior to the public hearing will be
submitted to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission will consider such comments, in addition to
any oral testimony, before making a decision on the proposed project or the proposed addendum to the Environmental
Impact Report.
If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at
the public hearing, described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at,
or prior to, the public hearing. Be advised that as a result of public hearings and comment, the Planning Commission
may amend, in whole or in part, the proposed project and/or the associated environmental document. Accordingly,
the designations, development standards, design or improvements, or any properties or lands within the boundaries
of the proposed project, may be changed in a way other than specifically proposed.
Please send all written correspondence to: RTVERST.DE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
P. O. Box 1409
Riverside, CA 9_502-1409
First American Title Insurance Company
362514th Street
Riverside, California 92502
Phone (909) 787-1700
Property Owners Certification
I. LYSA S 0 BAMPO CERTIFY THAT ON 0 CT, 2 6 , 9 THE ATTACHED PROPERTY
OWNERS LIST WAS PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE' INSURANCE COMPANY PURSUANT TO
APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FURNISHED BY THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
SAID LIST IS A COMPLETE AND TRUE COMPILATION OF THE OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
AND ALL OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 600' FEET (PERSONS OWNING MULTIPLE
PROPERTIES SHALL ONLY BE COUNTED OUNCE) OF THE PROPERTY INVOLVED IN THE
APPLICATION AND IS BASED UPON THE LATEST EQUALIZED ASSESSMENT ROLLS.
'NAME: LYSA SOBAMPO
TITLE/REGISTRATION: CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE
I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION FILED IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I UNDFRSTANDTHATTHE
INCORRECT OR ERRONEOUS INFORMATION MAY BE GROUNDS FOR REJECTION OR DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION.
SIGNATURE ,y�V \'A' C\ R ., z�F`r
DATE: OCT.26 1CJ99 CASE NO.:SEE MAPS ATTACHED
APN 7 53-070-010 APN 753-070-012 APN 753-070-014
753 USA 753 USA 753 USA
US DEPT OF INTERIOR US DEPT OF INTERIOR US DEPT OF INTERIOR
WAS94 NGTON DC 21401 WASHINGTON DC 21401 WASHINGTON DC 21401
1
APN 753-070-017 APN 753-070-018 APN 753-070-027
U S A 753 HOWARD B. KECK HOWARD B. KECK
U S DEPT OF INTERIOR
WASHINGTON DC 21401
APN 753-070-031
APN 761-090-009
APN 761-090-010
HOWARD B. KECK
BERTHA L. & MAURICE L. RATTERREE
DANNY RICHARD SWENSON
300 BEL AIR RD
80550 58TH AV
80600 58TH AV
LOS ANGELES CA 90077-3813
LA QUINTA CA 92253-7661
LA QUINTA CA 92253-7662
APN 761-090-011
APN 761-090-012
APN 761-090-015
CHRISTOPHER L. SHAVER
JON E. MCCLURE
PHYLE COMMERCIAL R/E LLC
PO BOX 716
PO BOX 137
7183 N MAIN ST
PALM DESERT CA 92261-0716
OKOBOJI IA 51355-0137
CLARKSTON MI 48346-1570
APN 761-100-003
APN 761-100-004
APN 761-100-005
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
GHODS TRUST PT
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
426 N 44TH ST #375
2870 S HARBOR BLVD
426 N 44TH ST #3i5
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 "
SANTA ANA CA 92704-5806
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-100-006
APN 761-100-007
APN 761-100-008
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
JOHN J. GOGIAN
761 USA
426 N 44TH ST #375
41910 BOARDWALK #A10
US DEPT OF THE INTERIOR
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095
WASHINGTON DC 21401
APN 761-100-012
APN 761-110-001
APN 761-110-002
CHARLES H. SHAW
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
14081 MAGNOLIA ST SPC 73
426 N 44TH ST #375
426 N 44TH ST #375
WESTMINSTER CA 92683-4748
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-110-003
APN 761-110-004
APN 761-110-006
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
EFERN 3 LISA J. CASTRO
426 N 44TH ST #375
426 N 44TH ST #375
80800 60TH AV
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
LA QUINTA CA 92253-7645
APN 761-110-008
APN 761-110-010
APN 761-110-011
JAMES R. DODD
HUMBERTO D. & GUADALUPE M. SANCHEZ
761 USA
59781 MADISON ST
56491 HWY 111
US DEPT OF THE INTERIOR
THERMAL CA 92274-9137
THERMAL CA 92274-9602
WASHINGTON DC 21401
AP ) 761-110-012
APN 761-110-013
APN 761-110-014
761 USA
BARBARA J. THURO
BARBARA J. THURO
US DEPT OF THE INTERIOR
1905 WARMLANDS AV
1905 WARMLANDS AV
WASHINGTON DC 21401
VISTA CA 92084-3333
VISTA CA 92084-3333
ON " 761-170-039
RIELLY HOMES MADIS
APN "161-120-010 APN 761-120-012 APN 761-120-016
KEVIN P. 3 KIMBERLY L. KELSEY TIMOTHY Y. KRAUSHAAR RAYMOND I. LINDQUIST
PO BOX 1391 115 4TH ST 568 AVENIDA SEVILLA #B
LA O'-tkNTA CA 92253-1391 SEAL BEACH CA 90740-6010 LAGUNA HILLS CA 92653-4075
I
APN 761-120-026 APN 761-130-012 APN 761-170-037
761 USA 761 USA KSL DESERT RESORTS INC
UNKNOWN 10-06-87 US DEPT OF THE INTERIOR 56140 PGA BL
WASHINGTON DC 21401 LA QUINTA CA 92253-4600
APN 761-200-001 APN 761-200-001 APN 761-200-003
KATHERINE K. & HAR & ARTHUR M. KATHERINE K. 3 HAR 3 ARTHUR M. KATHERINE K. 8 HAR & ARTHUR M.
3625 W 39TH ST 3625 W 39TH ST 3625 W 39TH ST
LOS ANGELES CA 90008-1814 LOS ANGELES CA 90008-1814 LOS ANGELES CA 90008-1814
APN 761-200-004 APN 761-200-006 APN 761-200-007
KATHERINE K. S HAR 3 ARTHUR M. JESUS BARAJAS PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
3625 W 39TH ST 58500 MADISON ST 426 N 44TH ST #375
LOS ANGELES CA 90008-1814 THERMAL CA 92274-9725 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-200-008 APN 761-210-002 APN 761-210-003
CVCWD PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
PO BOX 1058 426 N 44TH ST 0375 426 N 44TH ST 0375
COACHELLA CA 92236-1058 " PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-210-004 APN 761-210-005 APN 761-210-006
VENUS RANCHES INC VERNON 8 DINETTE & BRAD NUSSBAUM HENRY 8 MARY CHRISTINE RANDAZZO
45701 MONROE ST #N PO BOX 1178 59650 MADISON ST
INDIO CA 92201-3964 INDIO CA 92202-1178 THERMAL CA 92274
APN 761-210-007 APN 761-220-002 APN 761-220-003
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
426 N 44TH ST #375 426 N 44TH ST #375 426 N 44TH ST #375
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PKOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-220-004 APN 761-220-005 APN 761-220-006
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
426 N 44TH ST #375 426 N 44TH ST STE 375 426 N 44TH ST #375
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-220-007 APN 761-220-008 APN 761-220-009
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
426 N 44TH ST STE 375 426 N 44TH ST STE 375 426 N 44TH ST #375
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
AP' 761-220-010 APN 761-220-011 APN 761-220-013
LILY M. OROURKE 761 USA CVCWD
12137 PALM CT US DEPT OF THE INTERIOR 85820 COACHELLA HEIGHTS
GRAND TERRACE CA 92313-5329 WASHINGTON DC 21401 COACHELLA CA 92236
API "761-220-018 APN 761-220-019 APN 761-220-020
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
426 N 44TH ST 0375 426 N 44TH ST #375 426 N 44TH ST #375
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-220-021 APN 761-230-001 APN 761-230-002
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN FRANK R. 6 LINDA H. SWINIUCH CVWD
426 N 44TH ST #375 133 COVENTRY RD PO BOX 1058
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 KENMORE NY 14217-1159 COACHELLA CA 92236.1058
APN 761-230-003 APN 761-230-004 APN 761-230-005
CVWD FRANK R. & LINDA H. SWINIUCH RICHARD J. MEYER
PO BOX 1058 133 COVENTRY RD PO BOX 3046
COACHELLA CA 92236-1058 KENMORE NY 14217-1159 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92659-0590
APN 761-230-006 APN 761-230-008 APN 761-230-009
RICHARD J. & SUZANNE M. MEYER PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
PO BOX 3046 426 N 44TH ST #375 426 N 44TH ST #375
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92659-0590 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-230-010 APN 761-230-011 APN 761-230-012
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN MOUNTAIN DEV LLC CORAL ?ALM SPRINGS MAG LAN
426 N 44TH ST #375 426 N 44TH ST #375 426 N 44TH ST #375
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 " PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
l
APN 761-230-013 APN 761-230-014 APN 761-230-015
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN LILY M. OROURKE PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
426 N 44TH ST STE 375 12137 PALM CT 426 N 44TH ST STE 375
PHOENIX AZ 850084695 GRAND TERRACE CA 92313-5329 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-230-016 APN 761-310-002 APN 761-310-009
761 USA 120 LA QUINTA PAUL S. WEINBERG
US DEPT OF THE INTERIOR 1570 LINDA VISTA DR
WASHINGTON DC 21401 SAN MARCOS CA 92069-3808
APN 761-310-013 APN 761-310-016 APN 761-330-003
WILLIAM J. 3 KIM M. HAMMER WILLIAM J. 3 KIM M. HAMMER PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
PO BOX 278 PO BOX 278 426 N 44TH ST #375
PALM DESERT CA 92261-0278 PALM DESERT CA 92261-0278 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-330-004 APN 761-330-005 APN 761-330-006
PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PETER RABBIT FARMS INC
426 N 44TH ST #375 426 N 44TH ST #375 85810 GRAPEFRUIT BLVD
PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 COACHELLA CA 92236-1831
AP' - ) 761-330-007 APN 761-330-008 APN 761-330-013
YSAAC ROSS PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
PO BOX 4527 426 N 44TH ST #375 426 N 44TH ST #375
PALM SPRINGS CA 92263.4527 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 61-330-014 APN 761-340-001 APN 761-340-002
RECYC INC PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN PALM SPRINGS MAGELLAN
114 BUSINESS CENTER DR 426 N 44TH ST 0375 426 N 44TH ST #375
CO"n- NA CA 91720-1724 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695 PHOENIX AZ 85008-7695
APN 761-340-003 APN 761-350-013 APN 761-350-014
NURSERIES COCOPAH CHARLES R. FAUSEL CAL SUNGOLD INC
PO BOX 920 PO BOX 1540
LA QUINTA CA 92253-0920 INDIO CA 92202-1540
APN 761-350-015 APN 761440-003 APN 761-440-004
JEAN CHARLES INC GEORGIA DIRKS KUTNER LEDA DOCKSTADER
82449 61 ST AV PO BOX 1108 2240 S PALM CANYON DR #24
THERMAL CA 92274-8711 RANCHO MIRAGE CA 92270-1108 PALM SPRINGS CA 92264-9358
APN 761-440-008 APN 761-440-011 APN 761-440-012
DONALD J. 3 KASNEA MARTIN LEONARD LUNING 43750 VIA PALMA J. PAUL THOMASSEN
PALM DESERT CA 92211-8200 709 N WESTWOOD PL
ANAHEIM CA 92805-2432
APN 761-440-015 APN 761-440-016 APN 761-440-017
ARCHINE V. N. FETTY MARCIALEE H. LAMBIEL ARCHINE V. N. FETTY
3304 SILVER OAK LN " 82194 WARING WAY 3304 SILVER OAK LN
VISTA CA 92084-6614 INDIO CA 92201-7535 VISTA CA 9208"614
i
APN 761-440-018 APN 761-440-019 APN 761-540-001
BONNESS PROP CO LEONARD LUNING JOHN J. GOGIAN
4334 ECHO GLEN DR
DAILAS TX 75244-7421
41910 BOARDWALK #Al0
PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095
APN 761-540-002 APN 761-540-003 APN 761-540-004
JOHN J. GOGIAN JOHN J. GOGIAN JOHN J. GOGIAN
41910 BOARDWALK #A10 41910 BOARDWALK #A10 41910 BOARDWALK #A10
PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095 PALM DESERT CA 92211.9095 PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095
APN 761-540-013 APN 761-540-014 APN 761-540-015
JOHN J. GOGIAN JOHN J. GOGIAN KENT M. 3 MARY E. CORNELL
41910 BOARDWALK #A70 41910 BOARDWALK #Al0 PO BOX 244
PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095 PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095 LA QUINTA CA 92253-0244
APN 761-540-016 APN 761-540-017 APN 761-540-018
JOHN J. GOGIAN JOHN J. GOGIAN JOHN J. GOGIAN
41910 BOARDWALK #A70 41910 BOARDWALK #A10 41910 BOARDWALK #A10
PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095 PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095 PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095
AR ) 761-540-019 APN 761-540-020 APN 761-540-021
JOHN J. GOGIAN JOHN J. GOGIAN JOHN J. GOGIAN
41910 BOARDWALK #A10 41910 BOARDWALK #A10 41910 BOARDWALK #A10
PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095 PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095 PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095
APN "'761-540-022
it
JOHN J. GOGIAN
41910 BOARDWALK #A70
PAl DESERT CA 92211-9095
APN 761-540-027
JOHN J. GOGIAN
41910 BOARDWALK NA10
PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095
APN 761-540-023
JOHN J. GOGIAN
41910 BOARDWALK MA10
PALM DESERT CA 92211.9095
APN 761-540-026
JOHN J. GOGIAN
41910 BOARDWALKC #A10
PALM DESERT CA 92211-9095
y in
ravid'Deed-S. Calif. Gas Co.
Transmission Planning Asst.
'O Box 2300
�hatswnrth, CA 91313-2300
,ity of Indio
'.O. Box 1788
ndio, Ca. 92202
�oachella Valley
%Ssociation of Governments
13 - 710 Fred Waring Drive N 200
Palm Desert, Ca. 92260
the Nature Conservancy
!01 Mission Street, 4T" Floor
Tan Francisco, Ca. 92260
fir. Enrique De Leon
Imperial Irrigation District
P.O. Box 1080
La Quinta, Ca. 92253
Tierra Club - Tahquitz Group
-tttn: Jeff Morgan
1485 E. Via Escuela
Palm Spring, Ca. 92262,
-kttn: Christian Ingnacio
Mojave Desert Air Quality Mgmt. Dist.
Planning Section
15428 Civic Drive, Ste 200
Victorville, Ca. 92392 - 2383
iouthern California Gas Company
13100 W. 14T"
Blythe, Ca. 92225
Caltrans District 18
Department of Planning
464 W. 4T" Street
San Bernardino, Ca. 92401 -1400
Coat 'Ecological Reserve Foundation
PO Box 2821
Palm Desert, CA 92261
Southern California Gas Co. Attn: Richard T. Tyree
211 N. Sunrise Way General Telephone Company
Palm Springs, Ca. 92262 83-793 Dr. Carreon Blvd.
Indio, Ca. 92201
Attn. Peggie Reves U.S. Department of Interior
Desert Sands Unified School District Bureau of Land Management
47 - 950 Dune Palm Road P.O. Box 1260
La Quinta, Ca. 92253 N. Palm Springs, Ca. 92258
California Department of Parks & Recreation Coachella Valley Preserve
P.O. Box 2390 P.O. Box 188
1416 9T" Street, Room 1435 Thousand Palms, Ca. 92276
Sacramento, Ca. 95811
Attn. Joe Cook Southern California Gas Company
Coachella Valley Water District 211 N. Sunrise Way
P.O. Box 1058 Palm springs, Ca. 92262
Coavhella, Ca. 92236
San Bernardino County Museum Sierra Club - San Gorgonio Chapter
2024 Orange Tree Lane Attn: Joan Taylor
Redlands, Ca. 92374 1800 S. Sunrise Way
Palm Springs, Ca. 92264
Attn: Dan Silver California Native Plant Society
Endangered Habitat League 1722 "J" Street, Suite 17
8424 "A" Santa Monica Blvd. #592 Sacramento, Ca. 95815
Los Angeles Ca. 90069 - 4210
Al McCandless Public Library California Regional Water Quality
200 Civic Center Mall Control Board - tl7
Indio, Ca. 92201 73 - 720 Fred Waring Drive #100
Palm Desert, Ca. 92260
Southern California Edison Company Southern California Edison Company
505 W. 14T" Street 36100 Cathedral Canyon
Bl}the, Ca. 92225 Cathedral City, Ca. 92234
City of La Quinta City of Coachella
P. O. Box 1504 1515 & Street
La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Coachella, CA 92236
Coachella Valley Preserve Southern Coachella Valley Advisory Committee
PO Box 188 PO Box 302
Thousand Palms. CA 92276 Thermal, CA 92274
Coachella Valley Recreation & Parks Dist.
45-87i Clinton Street
Indio, CA 92201
SP 218 (Coral Mountain)
Y:1Lables\sp00218al.wpd
Coachella Valley School District
P.O. Box 847
Thermal, CA 92274
Mr. Alex Bowie
Howie, Arnrson, Wiles & biannone
4920 Campus Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
,, a
I Planning Commission County of�de
2 RESOLUTION
RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
3 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 218
4 (CORAL MOUNTAIN, formerly RANCHO LA QUINTA)
5 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65450 etet seg., a public
6 hearing was held before the Riverside County Planning Commission in Riverside, California on
7 April 12, 2000 and May 24, 2000 to consider Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No. 218 (Coral
8 Mountain, formerly Rancho La Quinta), which specific plan was adopted by the Riverside County
9 Board of Supervisors pursuant to Resolution No. 88-483 (dated October 6, 1988); and,
10 WHEREAS, all the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act and the
11 Riverside County Rules to Implement the Act have been met, and the Addendum to Environmental
12 Impact Report (EIR) No. 232, prepared in connection with Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan No.
13 218 andrelated cases (referred to alternatively herein as "the project"), is sufficiently detailed'so that
w
14 all the potentially significant effects of the project on the environment and measures necessary to
15 avoid or substantially lessen such effects have been evaluated in accordance with the above-
16 referenced Act and Rules; and,
17 WHEREAS, the matter was discussed fully with testimony and documentation presented
18 by the public and affected government agencies; now, therefore,
19 BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND, DETER.'�IINED, AND ORDERED by the Planning
20 Commission of the County of Riverside, in regular session assembled on June 21, 2000, that:
21 1. The proposed amendment would change the specific plan name from "Rancho La
22 Quinta" to "Coral Mountain".
23 2. The proposed amendment would do each of the following: reduce dwelling units to
24 a maximum of 2,740 by eliminating 1,522 previously proposed units, reduce
25 commercial acreage from thirty-five (35) to twenty-seven (27) acres, increase the
26 acreage of the golf courses from three hundred eighty (380) to five hundred fourty-
27 one (541), and improve on -site traffic circulation and area -wide access via a revised
28 street pattern.
1
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3. More specifically, the community park would be eliminated from the specific plan;
the former golf course clubhouse site would be converted to medium -density
residential and commercial uses (Planning Areas 22 and 23); new golf course
clubhouse sites and maintenance facilities would be designated as, Planning Areas 1,
7, 11, 13, 19, 30, 48, and 50; the golf courses would be redesigned and designated
as Planning Areas 11, 19, and 50; Planning Areas 2 through 6, 8 through 10, 12, 14
through 18, 22, and 51 would be designated as medium density residential (2-5
du/ac); Planning Areas 23 through 29, 31, through 47, 49, and 53 would be
designated as medium high density residential (5-8 du/ac); Planning Areas 21, 33,
and 52 would be designated as commercial; overall the project would result in a
decrease in dwelling units from 4,262 to 2,740. -
4. The proposed amendment would modify the design guidelines for the project. Plans
and standards for streetscapes, entries, the park, open space paseos, a comprehensive
w
trail plan, sensitive riparian open space and community gardens would be updated.
Product types, lot size minimums and development standards would remain the same,
but product distribution and planning area configuration would be adjusted to add the
new area.
5. The proposed amendment would update the Specific Plan Master Circulation Plan
by downgrading Madison Street between 58" and 60`h Streets from an Urban Arterial
Highway to an Arterial Highway to make it consistent with recent County -adopted
amendments to the Master Plan of Arterial Highways.
6. No potentially significant environmental impacts are associated with the proposed
amendment and related cases other than those identified in EIR No.,232 and those
impacts would be avoided or lessened (reduced to a level of insignificance) by the
mitigation measures listed in Resolution No. 88-483 Adopting Specific Plan No. 218
(a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference in its
entirety).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Commission that:
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1. The proposed amendment would be consistent with the intent, design and mitigation
approved for Specific Plan No. 218.
2. The proposed amendment would be consistent with all elements and applicable
policies of the Comprehensive General Plan, as amended by related Comprehensive
General Plan Amendment No. 493.
3. The proposed amendment would not have a significant effect on the environment.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Commission that it has reviewed and
considered EIR No. 232, Environmental Assessment No. 37465, and the Addendum to
Environmental Impact Report No. 232 in evaluating the proposed amendment and that the
Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 232 is an accurate and objective statement that
complies with the California Environmental Quality Act and reflects the County's independent
judgement.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Commission that it recommends
CERTIFICATION of the Addendum to EIR No. 232 and ADOPTION of Amendment No. 1 to
Specific Plan No. 218, subject to the conditions of approval as recommended.
Y:\TM2\Keith\SPs\sp00218a 1 peres2.%%pd
3
-I -
Ordinance No. 348.
Amending Ordinance No. 348 Relating to Zoning
The Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside Ordains as Follows:
Section 1. Section 4.41 of Ordinance No. 348, and Lower Coachella Valley Plan Map No.
41, as amended, are further amended by placing in effect the zone or zones as shown on
the map entitled Change of Official Zoning Plan, Lower Coachella Valley District, Map
No. 41.028, Change of Zone Case No.6464 which map is made part of this ordinance.
Section 2. Article XVIIa of Ordinance No. 348 is amended by adding thereto a new
Section 17.50 to read as follows:
SECTION 17.50. SP ZONE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIC
PLAN NO. 218, AMENDED NO. 1.
1. Planning Areas 2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,12,14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 22, and 51.
(1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 1 of Specific Plan No. 218 Amended
No. 1 shall be the same uses as those pennitted in Article VI, Section 6.1 and Article
VIIId, Section 8.91 of Ordinance No. 348. In addition, the permitted uses identified
under,section 8.91 shall include well sites. I
(2) The development standards for Planning Areas 22,3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 11,
15, 16, 18, 22 and 51 of Specific Plan No. 218 Amended Number 1 shall be the same
as those standards identified in Article VI of Ordinance No. 348 except that the
development standards set forth in Article VI, Sections 6.2(a), (b), (c), and (e)(2) and
(3) shall be deleted and replaced by the following:
A. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height
of thirty-five feet (35').
B. Lot area shall be not less than six thousand fifty (6,050) square feet. The
minimum lot area shall be determined by excluding that portion of lot that is used
solely for access to the portion o f a lot used as a building site.
C. The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be -.used as a
building site shall be fifty -fire feet (55') with a minimum average depth of one
hundred ten feet (110'). That portion of a lot used for access on flag lots shall have a
minimum width of thirty feet (30').
D. Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than five feet (5').
Side yards on corner and reversed corner lots shall be not less than fifteen feet (151)
from the existing street Iine or from any future street line as shown on any Specific
Plan of highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main
building sides, except that where the lot is less than sixty feet (60') wide, the yard
need not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the width of the lot.
E. The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'), except when the rear
yard adjoins a golf course or open space, the rear yard shall be not less
than fifteen feet (15').
\\TLivIA-PLAN\SYS\FILES\TiNv12`,Keith\SPs1sp00218a I czord2.doc
-2-
F. The garage or carport shall be set back from the back of the street
improvements according to the followin table:
Angle of the face of gara a from street: Minimum setback:
0 degree(parallel) to 29 degrees 20'
30 de rees to 44 degrees 17'
45 de ees to 59 de ees 14'
greater than 60 degrees 10,
F. In no case shall the garage or carport face be closer to the property line
than ten feet (10').
(3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as
those requirements identified in Article VI of Ordinance No. 348.
17. Planning Areas 1, 7, 11, 13, 19, 30, 48, and 50
(1) The uses permitted in Planning Areas 1, 7, 11, 13, 19, 30, 48, and 50 of
Specific Plan No. 218 Amended No. 1 shalI be the same as those uses permitted in
Article VIIIe, Section 8.100 of Ordinance No. 348. In addition, the permitted uses
identified under Section 8.100(a) shall also include undeveloped open space; hiking
and equestrian trails and facilities; arboretums; golf maintenance facilities; and
arboretums, and apiaries. Furthermore, the permitted uses identified under Section I
8.100(b) shall also include Country Club hotels. A,S3.
( j The development standards for Planning Area 1 7 11 13 19 30 48, and 50 ' 1 "' . '`,
,
of Specific Plan No. 218 Amended No. I shall be the same as those standards
identi f ed in Article VIIIe, Section 8.101 of Ordinance No. 348.
(3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as
those requirements identified in Article VIlle of Ordinance No. 348.
20. Planning Areas 23, 24, 25, 26, 27. 28, 29, 31, 32, 34, 35. 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41,
42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 49, and 53
(1) The uses permitted in Planning Areas 23, 24, 25. 26, 27, 28. 29, 31, 32, 34, 35,
36, 37. 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43.44, 45, 46, 47, 49,53 of Specific Plan No. 218 Amended
No. I shall be the same uses as those permitted in Article VI, Section 6.1 and Article
VIIId, Section 8.91 of Ordinance No. 348. In addition, the permitted uses-Lidentified
under section 6.11 shall include the well sites.
(2) The development standards for Planning Areas 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37.38, 39.40.
41. 42. 43, 44.45.46.47.49. and 53 of Specific Plan No. 218 Amended No. 1 shall be the
same as those standards identified in Article VI of Ordinance No. 348 except that the
development standards set forth in Article VI, Sections 6.2(a), (b), (c), and (e)(2) and (3)
shall be deleted and replaced by the following:
A. Building height shall not exceed three (3) stories, with a maximum height
of thirty-five feet (35').
B. Lot area shall be not less than five thousand square feet (5,000sf). The
minimum lot area shall be determined by excluding that portion of a lot that is
used solely for access to the portion of a lot used as a building site.
C. The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a
\\TL'vIA-PLAN,SYS\FILES\TM2\Keith\SPs\sp00218a 1 czord2.doc
-3-
building site shall be filly feet (50') with a minimum average depth of one hundred
feet (100'). That portion of a lot used for access on flag lots shall have a minimum
width of thirty feet (30').
D. Side yards on interior and through lots shall be not less than five feet (5').
Side yards on corner and reversed corner lots shall be not less than fifteen feet (15.)
from the existing street line or from any future street line as shown on any Specific
Plan of highways, whichever is nearer the proposed structure, upon which the main
building sides, except that where the lot is less than sixty feet (60') wide, the yard
need not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the width of the lot.
E. The rear yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20'), except when the rear
yard adjoins a golf course or open space, the rear yard shall be not less
than fifteen feet (151).
F. The garage or c ort shall be set back from the back of street
improvements according to the follawin table:
Angle of face of garage from street: Minimum setback:
0 de ree arallel to 29 degrees 20•
30 degrees to 44 degrees 17,
45 degrees to 59 degrees 14'
greater than 60 degrees 10'
F. In no case shall the garage or carport face be closer to the,property line
than ten feet (10').
(3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as ,.
those requirements identified in Article VI . ' of Ordinance No. 348. '.•
45A. Planning Areas 21, 33, 52
(1) The uses permitted in Planning Areas 21`22, and 52 of Specific Plan No. 218
Amendment No. 1 shall be the same as those uses permitted in IXb, Section 9.5 of
Ordinance No. 348. In addition, the permitted uses identified under Section 9.50(a)
shall also include health and exercise centers, private recreational facilities, office
furniture and equipment sales, pharmacies, lumber yards, and construction materials
sales. Furthermore, the pennitted uses identified under Section 9.50(b) shall also
include well sites; bars and cocktail lounges; health and exercise centers; day care
centers; congregate care residential facilities and active senior citizen facilities;
private clubs, fraternal organizations or lodges; and seasonal sales of Christmas trees
and Halloween pumpkins.
(2) The development standards for Planning Areas 21, 33, and 52 of Specific Plan
No. 218 Amended No. 1 shall be the same as those standards identified in Article
IXb, Section 9.53 of Ordinance No. 348.
(3) Except as provided above, all other zoning requirements shall be the same as
those requirements identified in Article VIII and Article IXb of Ordinance No. 348.
E. Planning Area 20
(1) The uses permitted in Planning Area 20 of Specific Plan 218. Amendment No.
1 shall be the same as those uses permitted in Article VIIIe, Section 8.100 of
\\TLMA-PLA'lN'`SY'S\FILES\TM2\Keith\SPs'-Isp00218a 1 czord2.doc
-4-
Ordinance No. 348. In addition, the permitted uses identified under Section
8.10.0(a) shall also include. well sites, undeveloped open space hiking and
equestrian trails and facilities, arboretums, golf maintenance facilities,
apiaries, and community facilities. Furthermore, the 2ermitted uses identified
under Section 8.100 b shall also include Country Club hotels.
(2) The development standards for Planning Area 20 of Specific flan No. 218;
Amendment No. 1 shall be the same as those standards identified in.Article
VIIIe, Section 8.101 of Ordinance348.
(3) Except as provided above, all other zoning ordinance requirements shall be the
same as those requirements identified in Article VIIIe of Ordinance No. 348.'
\\TLMA-PLAN\SYS\FILES\TM2\Keith\SPs\sp0021 Sa 1 uord2.doc