2005-05-03 CC Minutes & PH 1 - Washington-III, Ltd - Appeal Hearing
City Council Minutes
15
May 3, 2005
Alex Lambrose
Kimberly Nava
Cassie Peters
Ashley Rehbehn
Jenna Richardson
Jessica Rios
John Schuknecht
Matt Schumaier
* * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Adolph presented a proclamation to Mark Miller, representing the Riverside
County Department of Mental Health, in recognition of May being Mental Health
Month.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN
APPEAL FilED BY WASHINGTON 111 l TD, REGARDING GRADING PERMIT
CONDITION AND PROCESS OF FINAL MAP.
Public Works Director Jonasson advised a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) has been drafted and distributed to Council but the developer wishes
to discuss the timeframe for installing the drainage connection. Staff feels
60 months is an appropriate amount of time to determine the best way to
handle the construction. He indicated the developer has estimated the cost
at $175,000 but design and prevailing wages will most likely increase that
amount.
Mayor Adolph stated he understands Champion Motors expects to move in
2006, and asked if the storm drain would be needed if a new development is
required to retain its water on-site.
Mr. Jonasson stated the new development would probably be required to
retain the water on-site or to accommodate the runoff by installing the storm
drainage connection.
City Attorney Jensen advised the MOU anticipates the storm drain being
installed by either the City or a third-party but the language can be modified
to clarify that the drainage will not be needed if the water is retained onsite.
She explained the purpose of the five-year period was to prevent the City
having to incur the expense if a new development takes over the site.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Ms. Jensen advised it is difficult
to require a developer to reimburse the City for public improvements if the
improvements are already completed, and it would probably be subject to
legal challenge.
The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 7:21 p.m.
City Council Minutes
16
May 3, 2005
Jack Tarr, 30-240 Rancho Viejo, San Juan Capistrano, of Washington 111
Ltd., commended Assistant City Engineer Speer for the manner in which he
negotiated this matter. He indicated he would defer to the Council's
judgment regarding the 60 months. He is also in agreement with modifying
the MOU regarding a new development retaining their water onsite but
suggested it include all related tributary water.
There being no other requests to speak, the Mayor declared the PUBLIC
HEARING CLOSED at 7:23 p.m.
Council Member Henderson indicated she is somewhat challenged with the
60 months because a new development could come in at the 59th month,
and it could take up to 6 % years to get through the engineering and approval
time.
Mr. Jonasson stated he expects a new development on the site earlier than
that. He stated the plan was to include this as an AD project in the CI P next
year.
Council Member Henderson stated she would like the engineering for the
project to be flshelJ ready" so the project can be done in conjunction with
another project requiring Washington Street to be closed. She asked about
the status of the Simon Drive traffic signal.
Assistant City Engineer Speer stated the traffic signal should be installed
before the end of the year but most of the work will be on the west side and
there will be minimal impact to traffic.
Council Member Henderson stated she would like to add the storm drain as ,
an AD project to the CI P this year.
Council Member Perkins agreed.
Council Member Sniff noted the language indicates flwithin" 60 months, so
he doesn It see why the project can't be added next year.
Council Member Osborne stated he supports the MOU as recommended by
staff.
Mayor Adolph concurred, and stated his only concern is tearing up the
intersection again.
~._-_._.__._--- -
City Council Minutes
17
May 3, 2005
MOTION - It was moved by Council Members Henderson/Sniff to approve a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of La Ouinta and
Washington 111 Ltd. as amended regarding onsite water retention being in
lieu of storm drain connection. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE
ORDER NO. 2005-043.
Council Member Henderson complimented staff and the developer for
resolving this matter.
2. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE FISCAL
YEAR 2005/2006 THROUGH 2009/2010 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM (CIP) AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS PURSUANT TO HEALTH
AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33445(a).
Public Works Director Jonasson presented the staff report.
Consultant Nick Nickerson stated the school pedestrian crossings on Miles
Avenue and Dune Palms Road are scheduled to be completed once CalTrans
approves the plans. He explained CalTrans is providing 90% of the funding
for the improvements.
In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Jonasson stated the potholes on A venue
54 may need to be addressed as an emergency item through the City's
street improvement projects. Staff is considering doing a thin overlay now
and a white topping in 2006/2007.
In response to Council Member Henderson, Mr. Jonasson confirmed the
Avenue 158 Pavement Rehabilitation Improvements project is scheduled for
FY 2006/2007 but is part of the Operational Budget for Street Maintenance.
Mr. Nickerson indicated the Champion Motors storm drain project can be
added as AD' Project No. 59 but noted the project numbers do not indicate
priority.
Council Member Perkins inquired about the status of the Eisenhower Bridge.
He also reminded staff to include bike lanes and cigar-nose medians for left-
turn pockets whenever possible.
Mr. Jonasson stated the contract for the bridge has been awarded to Granite
Construction but some unexpected utilities have been identified. that have
caused a slight delay in the project.
Council Member Osborne complimented the Consultant for doing an
outstanding job on the report, and suggested staff consider applying the
ATTACHMENT 1
-` 4
CV
G�� 9ti5
OF Tom'
COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: April 19, 2005
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to Consider and Take
Action on Appeal Filed by Washington 1 1 1, Ltd.,
Regarding Grading Permit Condition and Process of
Final Map
RECOMMENDATION:
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR:
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
Conduct a public hearing to consider the appeal filed by Washington 1 1 1, Ltd.,
regarding Grading Permit conditions and the processing 'of Final Maps 32683-1,
32683-2, and 32863-3 in accordance with La Quinta. Municipal Code Section
2.04.130, and then take action as deemed appropriate by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal impacts directly associated with the consideration or action on
this appeal. However, if the appeal is granted, this could necessitate the
construction of drainage improvements in the vicinity of the Washington Park
project at the City's expense. If the appeal is denied, it is -possible that Washington
1 1 1, Ltd. could initiate litigation against the City, which would result in expenses
to the City. In addition, .if the opening of any new business located within
Washington Park project is delayed, this could result in a loss of tax revenue to the
City.
CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS:
None.
BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW:
On March 24, 2005, Washington 1 1 1, Ltd. submitted an appeal pursuant to
La Quinta Municipal Code Section 2.04.100. The items appealed include: (1) the
imposition of a condition on a grading permit which requires the installation of
facilities to accept tributary drainage flows from off -site; and (2) an objection to the
processing of Final Maps. based upon the grading permit condition.
3
310
A brief overview of the history of the Washington Park project with respect to
drainage requirements and conditions is necessary to understand the appeal.
The current appeal centers primarily around drainage which flows off of Champion
Chevrolet. The development of Champion Chevrolet (former, Simon Motors) was
approved prior to the incorporation of the City. To staff's knowledge, there was no
requirement for Champion Chevrolet to retain storm water on site. Currently, the
drainage from Champion Chevrolet flows off site onto Simon Drive, out to
Washington Street, and then flows south.
Historically, storm water from the Champion site flowed south into previously
undeveloped sand dunes, now mapped by the Washington Park development. In
2002, Champion storm water flowed to Simon Drive, then southerly at the east
side of the edge of pavement of Washington Street, ultimately draining again to the
Washington Park property. Curb and gutter on the east side ' of Washington Street
was installed by Washington Park in the fall of 2004. Following this recent curb
and gutter installation, Champion stormwater now flows on the east side
of Washington Street, contained by the newly installed gutter, and proceeds south
to the intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 47. In low flow storms, the
water turns east at Avenue 47 and flows to Washington Park's retention basins ' 1
and 5. In larger storm events, the water in ever increasing quantities tops the
crown of the street at Avenue 47 and continues south on Washington Street. _
On December 17, 2002, an Addendum to the Washington Park Specific Plan was
adopted. This was amendment #4 to Specific Plan 1987-011. On page 20,
Section W.B., the Drainage Plan is outlined, and it includes the following
statement:
"The existing drainage that currently enters the site will be intercepted
and directed into the site drainage system."
The relevant Conditions of Approval for the Specific Plan Amendment No. 4 are as
follows:
DRAINAGE
31. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section
13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More
specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100-year storm shall
be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the
City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the
centerline of the adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be
either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total
run off.
311 4
36. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in
flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the
development.
37. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property
shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic
downstream drainage relief route.
(Emphasis Added.)
The Tentative Tract Map approved -at the same time (TTM 30903) included the
following conditions:
DRAINAGE
32. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section
13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More
specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100-year storm shall
be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the
City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to. the
centerline of the adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be
either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total _
run off.
37. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in
flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the
development.
38. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess
of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a
designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route.
39. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property
shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic
downstream drainage relief route.
(Emphasis added.)
These same conditions are carried forward in Parcels 32683-1, 32683-21 and
32863-3.
312 5
The Hydrology Report for the project was not yet finalized as of the date the
Council considered the above items in 2002. The Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the project therefore included the following discussion:
The proposed project will be responsible for the drainage of on and off
site flows. A preliminary hydrology study has been prepared for the
project site ["Preliminary Hydrology Study," prepared by Pardue,
Cornwell & Associates, October, 2002.1 The preliminary hydrology
study prepared for the proposed project is still under review by the
City Engineer, and will be modified to conform to the City's standards
for on -site retention. In order to assure that this is the case, the
following mitigation measure shall be implemented:
1. The project proponent shall secure approval from the City
Engineer of the hydrology study for the project site prior to the
issuance of any grading permit.
Pursuant to the Mitigation Monitoring Plan, the measure was to be implemented as
follows:
The City Engineer would need to issue a letter of approval for the
hydrology study prior to grading.
Unfortunately, the Hydrology Report that was subsequently revised and
resubmitted by Washington 1 1 1's hydrologist did not account for the off -site
tributary areas. To the contrary, the report erroneously described the site as
follows:
The proposed project will develop 50 acres of retail center surrounding
the existing Lowes Home Improvement store. The site is currently
undeveloped with portions of the site previously' mass graded. The
remainder of the site consists of sand dunes with minor brush growth
in some areas. There are no off -site drainage areas tributary to the
site. Additionally, no outfall of drainage is proposed to leave the site.
Rainfall runoff will be contained on -site in four (4) retention ponds.
(Emphasis added.) Washington 1 1 1 does not wish to correct this oversight relative
to the off -site tributary drainage contribution of Champion Chevrolet.
313 6
The City does not have a formal process for approval of hydrology reports.
Instead, the method for final clearance is usually in the form of a letter from the
plan check firm that conducts the review. In a letter dated February 13, 2003,
addressed to Steve Speer, Berryman & Henigar stated:
I have re -checked the Mass Grading Plans of Washington Park, Tract
30903.
The Mass Grading Plan along with the Hydrology report is
recommended for City approval, pending additional City comments.
The City relies upon the developer's consultants to provide accurate, coherent
plans and reports. Although plans and reports are typically reviewed by outside
plan check consultants, it is not possible for the consultants to reconfirm all
assumptions. In particular, off -site information, such as the Champion Chevrolet
flows, are generally beyond the scope of outside plan check consultants as no data
is typically supplied by the engineer of record which would allow this verification,
and thus no verification can be performed for off -site conditions.
The City has now determined that the 2002 hydrology report was incorrect, and it
is the City's understanding that the engineers for Washington 1 1 1 do not disagree _
with this determination.
Public Works Staff Design Request
The Public Works Department seeks' additional storm water inlet structures for
Washington Street to properly drain Washington Street. The present
condition creates lane losses in storm events. More specifically, an effective lane
loss occurred on northbound Washington (3 lanes reduced to 2 lanes) for a storm
generating 0.5 to 0.75 inches of rainfall in 3 hours observed at the City in
December 2004.' By extrapolation, larger 10- to 20-year storms generating 1.0 to
1.5 inches of rainfall could reduce Washington to 1 lane of effective traffic flow.
The 100-year 3-hour storm is estimated to equal 2.2 inches of rainfall for frame of
reference. The Public Works Department wishes to avoid lane losses in standard
annual rainfall events.
The additional inlet structures for Washington Street would, by default, collect
Champion storm water. The Public Works Department recommends drainage to
Washington Street by taking the storm water on -site to Washington Park retention
basins 4 and 2 and subsequently passing through Champion Chevrolet historical
flows. The Public Works Department believes this design would adhere to the
governing Conditions of Approval, Specific Plan SP1987-01 1, Amendment No. 4.
314 7
It is the Public Works Department's conclusion that utilization of retention basins 4
and 2 with subsequent pass through of the Champion Chevrolet storm water flow
should not reduce the developable land for Washington Park.
The City and Washington Park's current engineer of record, The Keith Companies;
also seeks modification to Washington Park hydrology designs relative to other
problems now apparent with the original hydrology report for the project. For
example, Pad 1, adjacent to Adams Street, can not be constructed with the
hydrology assumptions previously utilized by Washington Park. The adjacent
Retention Basin 6 must be reconfigured to provide for proper stormwater storage
volumes. Similarly, inlet structures on Adams must be reconstructed to properly
collect adjacent storm flows.
Washington 111's Appeal
Washington 111 objects to the Public Works design request for storm water inlet
structures on Washington Street outlined above. Following meetings between
representatives of Washington 111 and City staff, it was the understanding of City
staff that a resolution regarding the matter had been reached. Meetings held with
Washington 111 representatives in early 2005 resulted in an apparent agreement
to the installation of 2 inlet structures on Washington Street. - Attachment 1
obtained from Washington 111 indicates this reflects that it was planning to
incorporate these inlets into its design at one time. Washington 111 also indicated
a Washington Street inlet on the Index Map for Phase 3 Precise Grading Plans
approved by the City on 3/30/2005 (Attachment 2).
Washington 111 then requested that the drainage plans include written disclaimers
and agreements that the City Attorney did not feel were appropriate content for
drainage plans. The language that Washington 111 sought to add is submitted
herewith as Attachment 3. The City Attorney's position was that if Washington
111 believed that the conditions being imposed on the grading permit exceeded the
City's authority under the original conditions of approval, Washington 111 needed
to raise that concern by objection or appeal rather than by inserting what was
essentially an unapproved contract that would purportedly bind future City Council
action as a note on a set of plans. After the City Attorney's disapproval of the
disclaimer language and agreement was reported by Public Works to Washington
111, Washington 111 indicated that it was justified in eliminating the Washington
Street inlet structures. Washington 111 also reported that insufficient capacity
was available to accommodate Champion Chevrolet flows.
On March 24, 2005, Washington Park filed an appeal of the Public Works
Department's decision with regard to the drainage conditions, and further. objected
to the processing of the Final Maps for 32683-1, -2 and -3. The appeal is
submitted herewith as Attachment 4.
315 8
Public Works Department's Response to Appeal
The Public Works Department believes that the appeal is without merit.
The Public Works Department does not believe that Washington 111 is complying
with the Specific Plan drainage conditions. Condition of Approval 39 states that
storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
Failure to install storm drain inlet structures on Washington prevents Condition of
Approval #39 from occurring. The historical downstream drainage relief route was
not Washington Street but land within Washington Park, which would ultimately
drain to areas now known as Caleo Bay Drive and Lake La Quinta. Further, failure
to provide storm drain inlet structures on Washington creates an unsafe driving
condition from water accumulation and effective lane closures in larger storm
events. Photos taken during the December 2004 storms Attachment 5) indicate
significant water collection adjacent to the gutter flowline at Washington which
effectively creates the loss of 1 of 3 travel lanes.
The Public Works Department does not believe that it is imposing new conditions,
but is rather compelling compliance with the existing conditions.
The Public Works Department is not requiring Washington 111 to accept all off -site
drainage, but instead is proposing a design that allows Washington 111 to pass the -
drainage through the site to historic downstream relief routes. Public Works
proposes that future inlet structures would be installed on Washington Street,
routed to adjacent retention basins 2 & 4. Overflows would be piped to 47' and
Caleo Bay and directed to Lake La Quinta as the historical downstream drainage
relief route.
Finally, the Public Works Department believes it is properly processing the Final
Map applications. Before the Final Maps are approved, Washington 111 must
comply with the conditions of approval to the tentative maps. As stated above,
the Public Works Department has concluded that Washington 111 has not yet
satisfied the conditions, including Condition No. 37, in not one, but multiple
locations within the Washington Park development. Public Works requests that a
revised hydrology report for all six phases of Washington Park be submitted and
approved by the City Engineer before approval and recordation of Parcel Map
32683.
In accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code Section 2.04.130, the Council is
required to. hold a hearing on the appeal. The Code then permits the City Council
to uphold the actions of the Public Works Department, overturn those actions,
modify those actions, or continue the matter to obtain additional information.
316 9
The Public Works Department and the City Attorney will be available during the
hearing to provide additional information.
FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Conduct a public hearing to consider the appeal filed by Washington 1 1 1,
Ltd., regarding Grading Permit conditions and the processing of Final Maps
32683-1, 32683-2, and 32863-.3 in accordance with La Quinta Municipal
Code Section 2.04.130, and uphold the actions of the Public Works
Department; or
2. Conduct a public hearing to consider the appeal filed by Washington 1 1 1,
Ltd:, regarding Grading Permit conditions and the processing of Final Maps
32683-1, 32683-2, and 32863-3 in accordance with La Quinta Municipal
Code Section 2.04.130, and direct a modification of the actions of the Public
Works Department; or
3. Conduct a public hearing to consider the appeal filed by Washington 1 1 1,
Ltd., regarding Grading Permit conditions and the processing of Final Maps
32683-1, 32683-2, and 32863-3 in accordance with La Quinta Municipal
Code Section 2.04.130, and sustain the appeal and give appropriate related
direction to the Public Works Department; or
4. Conduct a public hearing to consider the appeal filed by Washington 1 1 1,
Ltd., regarding Grading Permit conditions and the processing of Final Maps
32683-1, 32683-2, and 32863-3 in accordance with La Quinta Municipal
Code Section 2.04.130, and then continue the matter to obtain additional
information; or
5. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted,
Timothy J ly
on, Public Works Director
317 10
Approved for submission by:
Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager
Attachments: 1. Washington Park Retail Center Hydrology Map
2. Index Map for Phase 3 Precise Grading Plans
3. Washington 1 1 1's requested language for drainage plans
4. Washington 1 1 1 's appeal
5. Photo taken during the December 2004 storms
318
11
%TT79-CHM
0�6 d
CL
IVA
ram,
ti
Q15
XX
rp
CC
rr
41
wo
po
06
1A b.
. LU
Ct)
cc
c.......... . .......
L
O
..... .... .....
II.-L -k 4.-; . ........ ............... -_....__.-__._.......................... ;�
N 0 10 N I H 6 V /A ......
........... ......
3N
319 2.
...SAT A
Y�R : �� ¢ t' + i r '� + in
a INS
�S r ems/+. sro s I8 rr.
�s ��c 8 ; sue.
�x a _ 1� a
i b
�g S�$ I�; �` � b g � a • Its
� d i:J ��1 e , I
E fig
r g 9 b y �. a Fpe g _ r i�
fit
Rady
Grji r 9Y �R d P dE a IfS
1G; as g R p h fp s Yi Y.
! bq e i s6 OE
�
�� �gb e■ i� �� � ��R>i ��� i � � • � i� � � � yy� •�a $ � �� � Fp p ° ¢ Y9 (�+ F Z i � �� P �RY � S i $ i� ¢Y i � �� � � � ii i P�� L F �7 `� "� _ �-•+
Ar
zv $b�Y ; g v rQ� $ 12
i ■ }�
g a _$ S z Iso $ e e r i5 e b r i ! SIE z c�
S i d i �K b $ �d lift y g U
,•�.� <� '9�a z @ x i �� ' '�� �� =_? x x jj dap'
0.: .:Y 3 w K• r, s w r r •+ is ri a V
O 6
w z LGGGLL L $ ■�
_ ZZ yy P
�►� � � OCL
QQ•1 � � t w W� g �`i- � E � x �y�����i Y � R = � : "s• yK������ Fi � y�
MZM x 8 tls 41 _� . Y y, (•OtSC O e Y O ii�Eb a(
�a U g • d
"7' ✓� 4 g u� bz` "Ris erg - „." ! 8 $ _ M
b!iitbk Of
fix
Y Y YYEnYE$PS<
Q w _ �''•f
h•M 57 'ems sues■■■■ ■■■■■•■on ••+•i 4b
CIA
�� M O• •� �.. ,r `;, _ i i f MYYYYal$
�[ h N J i ■ i\ ■ s�� ice■ ■ g�j T'l 2c _ Y I
O z0 ..•�. '��%/�. _ ■ _� K� o. . f �g +ilia grist 4s
O^► 1� /p_„�, p Jjt�� f \ W • ■ —L_.. _ w Spa
ad $A$8�a$� ry S •t
51il lilt',
��U • $ 0. �( : w ai fill l�d�i€l�Ig � ¢¢
9�4 14 *own *ON;
t
Of
..4 z _ _
—----- ----------
�7� W W ASHINGTON STREET f• ^
WQ�o o lKGCe498tt1:i! I :i3Q¢a�EiK�y•¢ gF !�■ gK ■ p p fP'a; $ e ; i
�H
V � F..i� � 8 g� $��gY•3��{ � aaK+g+:sEi� e p � .
ZV► Z m �:i �g Z. q s 1.3 4apg` pKg s sp�i�p11 1 Q
�Cri pYbQ`Y ag�}iei
�2 zO$ a i!� i$gig= �;�i °`• zg::` rrAr:�w$� r6g
�✓ wi.b i S;'Sr 4Y z g c:a In F a i gg trx
Ji
lilt
�7 a P all
i" is y Vol@
It'll �1 s 1: jig
F T.9 W. r a
Ada e�K b Q E^ i i @@I: a $g ai i Q$ _ ii I pl lid
a K a iY e 4 "$ jj--
¢d �K� ��7a e,
i $ $K r K■d ■ r
K 4 Yr� s �gQ npnpi a aai� PgpcoiKm s 7i' r 7i�i� a� Q i��p!(3■Y�QQ �����
biF e i 4g_ ■ gd r�i�y b aa�6 iP C phaa: tC Y9
�E$� 6Q 4 I
" �$ r i $g >tr i a P '� 8 s q b • y S' _ 3$ F�, ;?A till I : ri �gIND
•p 2 e p , a a€$ �.p Ir �.p4 b ■ +Y 'a!p 4• ■ga�a� If
g gg
�i' g �� g iy � 1Y s$z Ie d v9
is p ¢ a $ # bb �� lR� ■ Pab Of7Y �g Py" �tb q�a
a YY3 b r l r h y Y r'•.
■' Eel �_ Z�'M �: I a " YI I r� CP baQE a G
a z tt t ei a a
iFO YrX 3 °4 [ -_ h■p[ ■ C
¢ 7{g� a h¢Y Yb Na„ a ■a $$8y3 Y Qd@S pE.F ■ giIgX 94
• gY f3 i E g Y 4r �y b_ sY �� 'Y e I Y 4 y� O b 'E ; i
6 Y= r >i s a^ Y aXc
ail i 3 3 a 101P a g p `i �a i ra " `� , z pi yak aeg f—% is a
z r ii i 1! C ` a c aS Y i s� € 'R� ,_ saa 1 AJa � Y r• y J$1 11 3 �i
a g gr S E bh : � rim cg e� G a if of rKQ s� ���, w 9� a;�if fit; 1b11
'� 116, z_G4rr$ ys., d¢ !¢ sA w qY ¢ $ Yh
WYb 3�3 EG Ro in= d�0.tK [ �� 2 i •tQ�
H b 91Y ��6 e., � r qq
.vw :i W ka.4sY� �;F ��`yr�
M, raj]• rN',rr.•�op JMO•. '✓. r....'• 9 ✓AG• - NO,
ENT
13132 a
ATTACHMENT
DRAFT
TO BE ATTACHED TO HYDROLOGY STUDY, STREET PLANS OR ANY OTHER
DOCUMENT THAT REQUIRES WASHINGTON 111, LTD, OR ANY SUCCESSOR, TO
ACCEPT DRAINAGE FROM LANDS OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY OF WASHINGTON
PARK
The City of La Quinta ("City") is requesting an acknowledgement ("Acknowledgment") from
Washington 111, Ltd., on behalf of itself and its successors -in -interest (collectively,
"Washington 111 "), that Washington 111 has agreed to accept into storm drain facilities,
including retention basins, curb inlet structures, oversized pipe and appurtenant facilities
(collectively, "Drainage Facilities") within or otherwise serving land within Tentative Tract Map
32683("Washington Park"), drainage from the Champion Motors site, located at 78-611
Highway 111, La Quinta, California bounded by Simon Drive and Highway I I I ("Champion
Site"), and perhaps other sites outside Washington Park as well (the Champion Site and such
other sites are collectively referred to as "Offsite Source(s)"). City has also requested that the
Acknowledgment be attached to any hydrology report, hydrology map and/or certain other
technical documents and/or plans related to the development of Washington Park.
As an accommodation to City only, Washington I I I has agreed to accept drainage from the
Offsite Sources ("Offsite Drainage"). However, in doing so, Washington 111 is expressly
reserving any and all legal rights Washington I I I has to recover from City, other agencies and
any or all owners and/or users of the Offsite Sources, including the Champion Site, (i) the cost of
expanding and improving any Drainage Facilities at Washington Park, as may be necessary to
accept such Offsite Drainage, (ii) the ongoing cost of maintaining and/or operating any Drainage
Facilities at Washington Park, including any remediation costs incurred because such Offsite
Drainage contains any environmental contaminants, including hazardous wastes, hazardous
substances, hazardous materials and/or pollutants, as described in federal, state and local laws
and regulations, and (iii) any damages to which Washington 111 may be entitled under the law.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, City has agreed to condition any future
discretionary permit issued in connection with any of the Offsite Sources, including the
Champion Site, to retain onsite all onsite drainage and all allocable offsite drainage, it being the
intent that, in the future, none of the Offsite Sources, including the Champion Site, will drain into
the Drainage Facilities at Washington Park. In the meantime, it is understood that City will
allow Washington III to construct deeper retention basins at Washington Park (i.e., with an
average of 2 to 3 feet deeper) than originally approved, to temporarily accommodate drainage
from the Offsite Sources, including the Champion Site, and when the Offsite Sources no longer
drain into the Drainage Facilities at Washington Park, City may require that the retention basins
at Washington Park be modified to be shallower.
City has also agreed that, if a discretionary permit application is received in connection with any
of the Offsite Sources, including the Champion Site, and there is not already an agreement in
place between the owner of the applicable Offsite Source and Washington 111, City will
condition such permit to pay to Washington 111, the applicable Offsite Source fair share of the
cost of (a) any initial oversizing of the Drainage Facilities required by the additional drainage
burden created by the Offsite Source (based on cubic feet of additional water volume added to
the Washington Park retention system), (b) continued maintenance of the Drainage Facilities
until the Offsite Source no longer drains into the Drainage Facilities at Washington Park and (c)
3?1
DRAFT
any modification of the retention basins at Washington Park required by City to make them
shallower after the Offsite Source no longer drains into the Drainage Facilities at Washington
Park.
By signing this document, the undersigned certify that they have read and understand this
document.
Signature of Washington 111
Signature of City Representative
Title of Document to which this document is attached
3 `' 2
ATTACHMENT Z
GRESHAM, SAVAGE, NOLAN & TILDEN �' =•
LAWYERS
(909) $84-2171 ::'',.� ;;, L }i +`; �� • .:..
Facsimile (909) 890-9690
CITY
ti`;:T4.1.•EI_�h'3 U CI`iL
TRANSMITTAL•
HAND DELMRED [E (_L_� i Q
H
TO: City Clerk MAR 2 5 2005
City of La Quinta
CITY OF LAWINTA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FROM: Mark Ostoich
DATE: March 24, 2005
RE: Appeal of Findings and/or Conditions
Enclosed are the following:
1. Check in the amount of $175, representing the required Appeal Fee.
2, Application for Appeal of Findings and/or Conditions
MAO/pmj
Enclosures
N:\W742\OOOU,LATtansmittal-City of La Quinta-01
3?3
is-
GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN Check Date Check No
COLA CITY OF LA QUINTA 03/2412005 084086
DocNo ApplyTo Vendor Credit No Vendor Inv No Open Amt Disc Amt Pay Arr,
084086 123795 $175.00 $0.00 $175.00 I
}• jr " y y `fN7
"t•` 1 F' 4
:. '. r
..:::iY•::'ai':: ' i,�%-lTi4 :n'•t�4�i,'.i'3;�?:n(_:i
ITI
• s
Stub Total $175.00 $0.00 $1T5.00
"OLORED BACKGI
I' • ON
�''S , A 0,..7j.r
A.0a
est 2nd.St.`wrpat 0314/200�5y-�.�
GO
�L t �. Yyf')�r� ti +.��'fi;�+P��i ^s'r.Y��3i'�i:Y,ift ��•
II'08408611' 1: 12 20004961: 58 10003 1 13t1'
324 ��
^1` + .
rx , -',
City of La QUinta
Community Development Department,, _ T
78-495 Calle Tampico ;'_ v= ,
La 53
Quintai.Califomia 922 F; t
(760) 777-7125 FAX (760) 77 133 r R
`cI i Y ut:
� I _-PlAtowmew 2L
}_(Cross out one that does not apply)
Applicadonfor
Appeal of Findings Andl
. g Or
OFFICE USE ONLY
CM r44.
� t �
Conditions
Appellant's Name .Washington 111, Ud. �atC 3/24/05
M,40ngAddress 78-365 Hwy ill, Suite 351, La Quinta, -CA 92253
Phone:. 760/ 485-5308
Resolution # and Condition(s) of Approval being appealed_;___
Any development review action may be appealed pursuant to Section 9.220.120
of the Zoning Code.
Please identify the type of application;
Type of Appeal:
Change of Zone _Tentative Tract
Specific Plan Tentative Parcel
Conditional Use PermitMap
Variance ______ Site'Dcvelopmeat Permit
Minor Use Permit ----- Temporary Use Permit
XXX Other . Grading Permit and Final
Pleprovide sufficient information so as to make clear the substan Map Approval
ase
If applicable, indicate the -number of the � °f each of the grounds for appeal,
specific condition which is being Drotested.
1. Appellant appeals and.ob'ects to the Gradin. Permit Condition that it install
facilities for the physical acceptance 'of tributory drainage flows from o s te.
2. Appellapt appeals -and objects to sitalling the a royal recess for the Final
based on this unrelated Grading Permit.. Maps
-XSee attached letter from Counsel for Appellant for additional information
)
Use additional sheets :if necessary. Washington 111, Ltd.
B6Wpal Finds -Coed
325 1$-
GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION •., ; !
LAWYERS - FOUNDED 1910
FOrt THE FIRM:550 EAST HOSPITALITY LANE, SUITES66 ; j +? ?
Mark A. Ostoich SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92408-4205
e-mail: Marfc.0uoicb hamsavage.com (909) 890-4499 - FACSIMILE (909) 890-9A •;r , ; ' i� A`
r
www.greshamsavagexom f.; iC C
March 24, 2005
HAND DELIVERED
City of La Quinta
Office of the City Council
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Re: Appeal of Approval of Grading Permit Conditions of
Approval for the Development of a Trader Joe's
Developer: Washington 111, Ltd.
Dear Council Members:
I represent Washington 111, Ltd., appellant in the above referenced matter. Mike
McCormick and Russ Behrens of McCormick, Kidman & Behrens are co -counsel. Together, we
are hopeful that we can resolve the issues that have recently delayed the development of the
Trader Joe's store appellant is developing near the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington
Street.
On December 17, 2002, the City of La Quinta approved Resolution No. 2002-167, which
adopted Amendment No. 4 of the Washington Park Specific Plan. The City added several
conditions of approval. On March 23, 2004, the City's Planning Commission approved Site
Development Permit 2004-800 for the development of a Trader Joe's store. The Trader Joe's
project involves approximately 12,000 square feet of space, which represents a very small
portion of the approved Washington Park project.
During the grading permit process for the Trader Joe's project, appellant received
comments that it would be required to_ construct a detention system, including modifying an
existing detention basin, to add sufficient capacity to accommodate not only on -site drainage, but
un-related . off -site, upstream drainage as well. After discussion and negotiation, including
discussion with the City Manager, appellant received a March 14, 2005 email from Paul Goble,
City of La Quinta Department of Public Works, stating: "Nevertheless, installation of the proper
faciities [sic] for the physical acceptance of tributary drainage flows remain a City policy and
standard condition of approval for development project." A copy of the Goble email is attached
as Exhibit "A".
RIVERSIDE OFFICE - 3750 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, SUITE 250, RIVERSIDE, CA 92501-3335 - (951) 684-2171 - FACSIMILE (951) 684-2150
VICTORVILLE OFFICE - 13911 PARK AVENUE, SUITE 208, VICTORVILLE, CA 92392 - (760) 243-2889 - FACSIMILE (760) 243-0467
326 19,
GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Mark A. Ostoich
City of La Quinta
March 24, 2005
Page 2
Appellant has recently learned that the City has stopped final map processing for Parcel
Maps 32683-1, 32683-2 and 32683-3. Appellant, through its design professionals, received a
March 21, 2005 email from Anthony Colarossi; Assistant Engineer I, that he could not "go any
further with PM 32683-3. It has been placed on hold until the hydrology is approved by the
public works engineers." A follow up email from Mr. Colarossi confirmed that the processing of
Parcel Maps 32683-1 and 32683-1 has also been stopped. Copies of the Colarossi emails are
attached collectively as Exhibit "B".
Appellant is treating.the Goble email as written action that appellant will be required to
accommodate on its property, all on -site drainage and unrelated off -site, upstream drainage.
Appellant_ hereby appeals that action pursuant to La Quinta City Code sections 2.04.100 .and
2.04.110. The action mentioned in the Goble email is unnecessary because appellant is already
accommodating all on -site drainage on its property and is complying with a condition of
approval that was imposed in connection with Amendment No. 4 of the Washington Park
Specific Plan and that requires appellant to ensure that all unrelated off -site historical storm
drainage from adjoining properties is passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief
route. The time has passed for the City to impose new conditions and requiring appellant to
accept all current flows of whatever nature from unrelated, upstream properties would result in
appellant bearing the cost of a public benefit that is not reasonably. related to appellant's
proposed use of its property.
Appellant is treating the Colarossi emails as written action that the final map approvals
will not be processed until the unrelated drainage issue is resolved. Appellant hereby appeals
that action. The action violates the Subdivision Map Act provisions regarding approval of final
maps that substantially conform to previously approved tentative maps.
A. Appellant is Complying with Condition of Approval No. 37.
In December 2002 when the City approved the Washington Park Project, it added
Condition of Approval No. 37, which provides, "Storm drainage historically received from
adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream
drainage relief route." Condition of Approval No. 37 was restated verbatim as Condition No. 51
in the Conditions of Approval for. Parcel Map 32683. Hereafter, for convenience, the applicable
condition of approval will be referred to as Condition of Approval No. 37. Appellant is
complying with Condition No. 37 by passing through storm drainage historically received from
the Champion Motors site into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
Condition No. 37 only applies to storm drainage historically received from adjoining
property. It does not apply to nuisance waters or any other flows generated by or on adjoining
property. Appellant believes that there are water flows generated by or on the Champion Motors
327
20
GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORA?ION
Mark A. Ostoich
City of La Quinta
March 24, 2005
Page 3
site, such as waters used to clean the motor vehicles. These waters are not storm waters and thus
Condition No. 37 does not require appellant to bear any responsibility for these flows.
The term "historically received" is somewhat ambiguous, but certainly refers to storm
drainage prior to December 17, 2002. If the term refers to a time prior to development, appellant
is informed and believes that storm drainage flowed south across both the current Champion
Motors site as well as appellant's property. The Champion Motors development significantly
increased historic storm drainage by paving over the ground. If the term refers to storm drainage
after the Champion Motors site was developed, the Champion Motors developers channelized
and concentrated storm drainage. Development of the Champion Motors site and Simon Drive
caused concentrated and channelized flows to create an earthen swale south along Washington
Street. In light to moderate storm flows, the drainage then curved to the east at 47`b Street. In
heavy storm flows, the drainage proceeded south down Washington Street towards Lake La
Quinta.
Regardless of whether the term refers exclusively to a period of time prior to
development of the Champion Motors Site or refers to both pre -development and post
development of the Champion Motors site, appellant is complying with Condition No. 37 by
passing the storm drainage into the historic downstream drainage relief route: Appellant has
ensured that all storm water received from Champion Motors is directed into .the curb and gutter
along Washington Street where it then travels into the curb and gutter along 47`' Street- if the .
storm water flow is light to moderate or continues south along Washington towards Lake La
Quinta if the flow is heavy. '
Condition No. 37 provides appellant with the choice to receive and retain the storm water
or pass it through. Appellant has chosen the pass through option.
B. The City Cannot Impose New Conditions.
Appellant's right to develop the Trader Joe's project in accordance with the Washington
Park Specific Plan and its supporting technical studies (one of which is a hydrology study that
does not require the accommodation of the off -site drainage that the City is now asking appellant
to accommodate), has vested in accordance with applicable California law. (Avco Community
Developer, Inc. v. South Coast Regional Comm. (1976) 12 Cal.3d 785.) Appellant relied on the
approved Specific. Plan, the underlying technical studies and applicable City development
standards and spent substantial money to construct drainage and street improvements that do not
provide inlet structures or otherwise contemplate the acceptance of off -site drainage flows. The
drainage and street improvements were designed in accordance with all applicable City
requirements and the City has already accepted all of the drainage and improvements.
Appellant has complied with all of the conditions of the Washington Park Specific Plan,
the Street Improvement Plans and its original approved Hydrology Plan. Appellant is .complying
328 21.
GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Mark A. Ostoich
City of La Quinta
March 24, 2005
Page 4
with Condition of Approval No. 37 by passing though storm drainage historically received from
Champion Motors into the historic downstream drainage relief route that runs down the swale
along Washington Street. The City cannot now impose new requirements or modify Condition
of Approval No. 37; because appellant's rights have vested.
C. The City Cannot Require Appellant to Accommodate All Off -Site Drainage.
The City's action requires appellant to install facilities for the acceptance of all .unrelated
off -site upstream drainage flows. This is inconsistent with Condition of Approval No. 37 which
only requires that appellant accept or pass through storm drainage historically received from the
Champion Motors site. This is also inappropriate since the Champion Motors drainage, is not
related to appellant's proposed use of its Washington Park property. The " City's action
impermissibly shifts the City's burden of paying for a public benefit to appellant.
Conditions imposed on land use applications "are valid if reasonably conceived to fulfill
public needs emanating from the landowner's proposed use." (Liberty v. California Coastal
Comm'n. (1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 491.) The Liberty case involved a developer who wanted to
demolish an existing structure and erect a restaurant across the street from a beach. The
California Coastal Commission approved the plan, with the condition that the developer agree to
provide adequate parking for patrons and public parking after 5 p.m. ,for 30 years, to offset the
need for public parking near the beach. This particular area required additional public parking
because of earlier planning failures to require other restaurants to provide. sufficient parking.
The developer challenged both conditions.
The California Court of Appeal agreed that beach parking was a problem and the
Commission properly required adequate parking for the restaurant. However, the Court ruled
that dedicated free parking went beyond the developer's own land use requirements. The
Commission was "attempting to disguise under the police. power its actual exercise of the power
of eminent domain." (Liberty, supra at 504). The court concluded that imposing the burden on
one property owner to extend beyond his own use "shifts the government's burden unfairly to a
private party." (Id.) The United States Supreme Court has specifically ruled that there must be
an "essential nexus" between the property owner's own use and the condition to be imposed.
(See Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'& (1987) 483 U.S. 825.)
Appellant acknowledges that it is responsible for addressing its own on -site drainage,
which it has done through its grading and site improvement plans. This is no different than the
developer in the Liberty case having to provide parking for its own patrons. Appellant addressed
.the storm drainage historically received from the Champion Motors site by ensuring that it passes
through to the historic downstream drainage relief route. However, the City's new requirement
that appellant receive and retain all drainage of whatever nature from other properties is
objectionable. because it is not related to appellant's proposed use of its own property. It would
3 9 2Z
GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Mark A. Ostoich
City of La Quinta
March, 24, 2005
Page 5
appear that perhaps adjacent property owners are not addressing thdir own on -site drainage. This
is unfortunate but the City cannot attempt to address that drainage by making downstream
property owners responsible for it. In effect, the City is asking appellant alone to bear the cost of
providing flood control measures where the danger of flood is not related to appellant's property
use. The City or upstream property owners should bear these costs.
The City's recent demand that appellant receive and retain all off -site drainage lacks the
"essential nexus" to the underlying Trader Joe's grading permit. The City has an obligation to
provide drainage and flood control and it cannot shift this burden to appellant where the drainage
is. not related to appellant's proposed use of its property.
D. The City Cannot Delay Approval of Final Maps That Are in Substantial
Conformance with Previously Approved Tentative Maps and on Grounds Unrelated to the
Maps.
The City has stopped final map processing for Parcel Maps 32683-1, 32683-2 and 32683-
. 3. The sole reason for the delay in processing is the unrelated dispute over the off -site drainage
condition discussed above. This delay violates the Subdivision Map Act.
Government Code section 66474.1 states that "a legislative body shall not deny approval
of a final or parcel map if it has previously approved a tentative map for the proposed
subdivision and if it finds that the final or parcel map is in substantial compliance with. the
previously approved tentative map." When a developer has produced a final map that satisfies
the previously approved tentative map, he is entitled to acceptance and approval of that final map
without the imposition of new or altered conditions. (South Coast Central Regional Comm'n. v.
Charles A. Pratt Constr. Co. (1982) 128 Cal.App.3d 830.). When a developer demonstrates
substantial conformance, approval of the final map is a ministerial act. (Beck Develop. Co. v. So.
Pac. Transport. Co. (1996) 44 Cal.App.4'h 1160.) New conditions may not be imposed at the
final map stage. (Id.; see also Government Code section 66474.2.)
The City previously approved a tentative map with conditions. Appellant has met all of
the conditions. Appellant has produced final maps that substantially conform to the previously
approved tentative map but the City is refusing to approve them. The City is now unilaterally
adding a new condition at the final map stage. The City is asserting that final maps cannot be.
processed until the: unrelated off -site drainage issue is resolved. The City cannot impose a new.
condition at the stage of final map approval.
E. Appellant's Requested Relief.
Based on the above, appellant respectfully requests that the City Council rescind the
.Department of Public Works imposition of a new condition that appellant be required to accept
and retain all unrelated, off -site drainage: Appellant further requests that the City Council
330 2,
GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Mark A. Ostoich
City of La Quinta
March 24, 2005
Page 6
instruct its staff to complete processing of the final maps for ultimate approval by . the City
Council.
Very truly yours,
t
Mark A. Ostoich, of
GRESHAM SAVAGE
NOLAN & TILDEN,
a Professional Corporation
MAO/MWN
Enclosures
N:1W742\000\L;tr\City Council Appeal grading permit conditions-06
331
24
GOBLE EMAIL
Exhibit "A"
332
2Ep
Phyllis Jackson
Subject:
FW: Washington Park
-----Original Message -----
From: "Paul Goble" <Pgoble@.la-quinta.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:01:26
To:"Phyllis Jackson" <Phyllis.Jackson@ greshamsavag.e.com>
Cc:".Jack Tarr" <tarr@cox.net>, "Bill Sanchez" <gsanchez@dc.rr.com>, "Tim Jonasson"
<tjonasson@la-quinta.org>, "Steve Speer" <sspeer@la-quinta.org>, "Kathy Jenson
(E-mail)"*<kjenson@rutan.com>
Subject: RE: Washington Park
Pursuant to my conversation with City Attorney, Kathy Jenson this morning, the City of La
Quinta is declining to approve hydrological study and plan attachment language pursuant to
your email transmittal of February 28, 2005. As indicated by the City Attorney, a formal
letter of protest to the condition could be generated, should you so desire.
Nevertheless, installation of the proper faciities for the physical acceptance of
tributary drainage flows remain a City policy and standard condition of approval for
development projects.
Thanks,
Paul Goble, P.E.
City of La Quinta Public Works
-----Original Message -----
From: Phyllis Jackson (mailto:Phyllis.Jackson@greshamsavage.com}
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 11:07 AM
To: Paul Goble
Cc: Jack Tarr; Bill Sanchez
Subject: Washington Park
From Mark Ostoich,
Mr. Goble,
At Jack Tarr's request, enclosed are provisions Washington 111, Ltd.
would like to have attached to hydrology studies, street plans or any other document that
requires Washington 111 or any successor to accept drainage from lands outside the
boundary of Washington Park.
Please look this document over and provide me your comments.
I will hear from you.
Thanks for your help.
Mark Ostoich
Phyllis M. Jackson
Legal Assistant to Mark A. Ostoich
GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN
550 E. Hospitality Lane, Ste. 300
San Bernardino, CA 92408-4205
(909) 884-2171
(909) 890-9690 (fax)
phyllis.jackson@greshamsavage.com
1
Please also let me know when
333
2f
COLAROSSI EMAILS
Exhibit "B"
334
2� -
Phyllis Jackson
Subject: FW: Final Map for Council Approval
-----Original Message -----
From: Tony Colarossi [mailto:acolarossi@la-quinta.org]
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 1:21 PM
To: Bill Sanchez
Subject: RE: Final Map for Council Approval
Yes, they are all held up.
Thanks, Tony
-----Original Message ----
From: Bill Sanchez [mailto:gsanchez@dc.rr.com]
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 11:59 AM
To: Tony Colarossi
Cc: Jack Tarr; Berny Zambrana
Subject: Fw: Final Map for Council Approval
Tony,
What about 32683-1 and 32683-2? Please confirm that these will not be held up.
Berny from The Keith Companies will be delivering the 8 1\2 x 11 sheets and stamped,cost estimates -that you requested today.
When will the SIA agreements for -1 and -2.be ready?
Thanks.
Bill Sanchez
Construction Manager
Washington 111, LTD
78365 HWY 111, No 351
La Quinta, CA 92253
0 760-342-2674
M 760-485-5308
F 760-342-4046
gsanchez@dc.rr.com
-----Original Message -----
From: Tony Colarossi [mailto:acolarossi@la-quinta.org]
1
3 35
29
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 11:13 AM
To: gsanchez@dc.rr.com
Subject: Final Map for Council Approval
Hey Bill. I can't go any further with PM 32683-3. It has been placed on hold until the
hydrology is approved by the public works engineers.
So, you need to satisfy Paul's concerns so that he will provide direction to me so that I
can provide you the SIAs for your signature.
Thank You, Anthony Coiaros.si
Assistant Engineer I
Phone (760) 777-7089
Fax (760) 777-7155
Email acolarossi@la-quinta.org ***When replying or sending an
email message to the City of La Quinta, please request a delivery receipt. Some email
adresses are automatically blocked through our firewall.*** .
Bill Sanchez
Construction Manager
Washington 111, LTD
78-365 HWY 111, No. 351
La Quinta, CA 92253
T 760.485.5308
F 760.564.3499
gsanchez@dc.rr.com
2
336 29
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (�;e 1 � -
This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is entered into this 3'd day of May,
2005, by and between Washington 111, LTD, a California Limited Partnership
("Developer''), and the City of La Quinta, California, a California Municipal
Corporation ("City").
WHEREAS, a dispute has arisen between Developer and City relating to certain
hydrology issues associated with the Washington Park development;
AND WHEREAS, Developer appealed certain action of the Public Works
Department to the La Quinta City Council, which commenced a public hearing on the
appeal on April 19, 2005, which hearing was continued to May 3, 2005;
AND WHEREAS, representatives of Developer and City have met in an attempt
to resolve the appeal and did reach a tentative resolution subject to formal approval
by way of this MOU;
AND WHEREAS, the purpose of this MOU is to outline the negotiated points.
Now, therefore, the parties agree as follows:
1. City agrees that the hydrology reports for Mass Grading, subsequent
amendments and for Phases 1 & 2 prepared by PCA for Developer contains City -
approved concepts. Developer agrees that the preliminary drainage concepts
contained in the report for the Phase 3 area of the development require
additional refinement pursuant to paragraph 4 that will be addressed by
Developer as part of the plan check process for the already submitted
construction improvement plans for Phase 3. Specifically, the City and
Developer agree to the following concepts contained in the report and its
accompanying hydrology map:
a. The size of the drainage tributary area that Developer is responsible for
retaining drainage on its site is approximately 65.1 acres including the
volume capacity of the retention basins as set forth in the reports
referenced in Paragraph 1, and does not include the tributary area known
as the Champion Motors site.
b. Hydraulic and storm drain plans for Phase 1 & 2 which includes Highway
111, Washington Street and Avenue 47 and all related offsite tributary
areas, including hydrologic and hydraulic concepts, offsite inlet structure
types, locations, assumptions and methodologies, as they pertain to
Phases 1 & 2 and adjacent streets except as set forth in Paragraphs 4 and
6, below, setting forth the need for additional inlets.
Page 1 of 4 338
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
2. City and Developer agree that currently the Champion Motors site drains to
Simon Drive which subsequently drains onto Washington Street with the flow
running south in the east gutter of Washington Street adjacent to the Washington
Park development site. The City and Developer further agree that it is desirable
to redirect the Champion Motors current storm drainage to an existing
underground storm drain system to convey that drainage northerly to the
Whitewater Channel. However, until the City or a third party constructs a
connection to the existing underground storm drain to affect redirection of that
flow, Developer agrees to accept the Champions Motors drainage flow (i.e. storm
flows, not nuisance flows resulting from business operations on the Champion
Motors site) provided that in doing so Developer is not required to oversize any of
its drainage facilities, either temporarily or permanently, to accommodate that
temporary drainage condition. Thus, excess drainage that is routed to the
retention basins on the Developer site will be allowed to flow offsite when the
retention capacity of the basins is exceeded.
3. City agrees to facilitate the design and construction, without cost to Developer, of
a drainage connection to an existing underground storm drain located in
Washington Street from an appropriate point on Simon Drive that affects
redirection of the Champion Motors drainage from its current drainage route
northerly to the Whitewater Channel. The drainage connection will be
constructed within 60 months of signing this Memorandum.
4. Developer agrees to install, at its cost, a drainage inlet and connecting surface
parkway drain in the east curb of Washington Street located north of the first bus
stop. The inlet will be built at the time of construction of Phase 3B of Washington
Park. The inlet will be sized for Developer's related tributary water for the 20-
year storm event pursuant to the amended hydrology report as referenced in
Paragraph 1 of this MOU. The drainage will flow from Washington Street via a
parkway drain under the meandering sidewalk on Washington Street to the
Washington Park parking lot where it will flow in the parking lot curb and gutter to
a catch basin that then directs the flow to Retention Basin No. 4 via an
underground storm drain pipe. To accomplish retention of the revised tributary
area associated with Retention Basin No. 4 (i.e. tributary area that was formerly
intended for Retention Basin No. 5) the City agrees that Developer may modify
the retention basin to accommodate a water depth exceeding five feet plus one
foot of freeboard as measured at the overflow location, provided the square
footage of the original retention basin footprint is not decreased.
5. Developer agrees that all retention basins, except for Retention Basin No. 4, will
be designed and constructed per Engineering Bulletin 97-03 or as otherwise
approved by the City Engineer as required by the Conditions of Approval. City
acknowledges that it has approved as an equal solution to Item # 6 of
Engineering Bulletin 97-03 the drywell solution for Washington Park based on the
letter of opinion issued by Sladden Engineering on Jan 14, 2005.
Page 2 of 4
339
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
6. Developer agrees to install, at its cost, an additional inlet in the east curb of
Washington Street immediately north of the intersection of Avenue 47 and
Washington Street, to intercept related flows generated from a 100 year storm
event and divert water through an open swale at approximately a 45 degree
angle to an outlet in Avenue 47 and to continue its path of surface drainage as
set forth in the (PCA - Phase 1 & 2) Hydrology Study. Construction of this
surface inlet would occur at the sooner of (a) construction of Phase 4 of
Washington Park, or (b) completion of the connection with the underground
storm drain in Washington Street north of Simon Drive.
7. Developer agrees that use of cantilevered buildings or equivalent structures as
contemplated and set forth in the (PCA - Phase 1 & 2) Hydrology Study will be
subject to the approval of the City Building & Safety Department and City Public
Works Director.
8. City agrees that all references to Developer will be deemed to include its
successors in interest to all or any part of Washington Park, provided use of the
Washington Park site remains as currently approved in Specific Plan 89-011,
Amendment #4.
9. City and Developer agree that the primary cause for any delays in the processing
of improvement plans was a result of a disagreement regarding the drainage
requirements regarding the Washington 111 development site. Now that the City
and Developer have resolved the drainage aspects that were in disagreement, it
is understood all future processing of improvement plans will proceed per
standard City processing policies. Improvement plans submitted by Developer
will be returned with plan check comments (if any) for revision in less than ten
(10) working days.
10.It is agreed that Map 32683-2 is scheduled for final approval at the May 3, 2005
City Council Agenda. It is also agreed that provided an agreement is reached on
the Items set forth in this MOU at the May 3, 2005 City Council meeting that the
City Engineer will schedule Map 32683-1 & 3 for the May 17,2005 City Council
meeting.
11. If all parties execute the MOU at or before the May 3, 2005 City Council meeting,
Developer shall withdraw its appeal.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the
day and year first written above.
Page 3of4 340
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
CITY OF LA QUINTA:
Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager
Date
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
City of La Quinta
DEVELOPER:
Approved as to Form:
M. Katherine Jenson, City Attorney
City of La Quinta
WASHINGTON 111, LTD., a California limited partnership
By: Old Anchor Inc., a California Corporation
Its: General Partner
13
Jack Oldham
Its: President
Date:
Date
Page 4 of 4 341