Loading...
2016 04 26 PCN Planning Commission agendas and staff reports are now available on the City's web page: www.la-quinta.orq PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta REGULAR MEETING on TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 2016 at 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance PUBLIC COMMENT At this time members of the public may address the Planning Commission on any matter not listed on the agenda. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approval of the minutes of March 8, 2016. 2. Approval of the minutes of March 22, 2016. PUBLIC HEARINGS For all Public Hearings on the agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Executive Assistant prior to consideration of that item. A person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing or appear in support or opposition to the approval of a project(s). If you PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 1 APRIL 26, 2016 challenge a project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public hearing. Beginning Resolution No. 2016-007 1. Environmental Assessment 2015-0004, General Plan Amendment 2015-0001, Zone Change 2015-0002, Tentative Parcel Map 2015-0007, Conditional Use Permit 2015-0002, and Site Development Permit 2015-0005 submitted by Chandi Group, USA proposing the construction of a 52,800 square -foot commercial center on 7.6 acres. Project: Washington 50. CEQA: Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program. Location: southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50. BUSINESS SESSION - NONE COMMISSIONER ITEMS DIRECTOR'S ITEMS ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission will be held on May 10, 2016, commencing at 6:00 p.m. at the City Hall Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Wanda Wise -Latta, Executive Assistant of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting was posted on the inside of the north entry to the La Quinta Civic Center at 78-495 Calle Tampico, and the bulletin boards at 78-630 Highway 111, and the La Quinta Cove Post Office at 51-321 Avenida Bermudas, on April 22, 2016. DATED: April 21, 2016 WANDA WISE-LATTA, Executive Assistant City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 2 APRIL 26, 2016 PUBLIC NOTICES The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at 777-7123, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's office at 777-7123. A one (1) week notice is required. If background material is to be presented to the Commission during a Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Assistant for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the meeting. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Commission regarding any item(s) on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the Community Development Department's counter at City Hall located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253, during normal business hours. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 3 APRIL 26, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2016 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to order at 7:06 p.m. by Chairperson Wilkinson. PRESENT: Commissioners Bettencourt, Blum, Fitzpatrick, Wright, and Chairperson Wilkinson incredible ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Gabriel Perez, Principal Planner Jay Wuu, Consultant Principal Planner Nicole Criste, Principal Engineer Bryan McKinney, Assistant City Attorney Michelle Molko, Executive Assistant Wanda Wise -Latta, and Executive Assistant Monika Radeva Commissioner Fitzpatrick led the Commission in the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENT - None CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA - Confirmed APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approval of the minutes of Special Joint City Council and Planning Commission meeting of January 12, 2016. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Blum/Fitzpatrick to approve the Special Joint City Council and Planning Commission minutes of January 12, 2016, as submitted. Motion passed unanimously. 2. Approval of the minutes of January 12, 2016. Staff said Director's Item No. 1 listed on page 3 will be amended to read as follow: "Planning Manager Perez stated that the City will prepare an ordinance on water efficient landscape measures consistent with Governor Brown's Drought Executive Order, which will be presented to the Planning Commission. He noted the ordinance PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 1 MARCH 8, 2016 will include water reduction strategies discussed during the June 16, 2015, City Council meeting." Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Fitzpatrick/Wright to approve the Planning Commission minutes of January 12, 2016 as submitted including the above stated amendment by staff. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Approval of the minutes of February 23, 2016. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Blum/Bettencourt to approve the Planning Commission minutes of February 23, 2016 as submitted. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Environmental Assessment 2013-630 and Conditional Use Permit 2013-152 submitted by Case and Lisa Swenson proposing a 5,929 square -foot single family home on 3.16 acre lot within the Enclave Mountain Estates. Project: Swenson Residence. CEQA: adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program. Location: 77210 Loma Vista. Consultant Principal Planner Nicole Criste presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Design and Development Department. Chairperson Wilkinson declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 7:29 p.m. Public Speaker: Mr. Case Swenson, Owner, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and expressed his gratitude to City staff, the Commission, the Enclave homeowners, and the Homeowners Association Chairman for their time and efforts on this project. Public Speaker: Mr. John Vuksic, President with Prest Vuksic Architects, Palm Desert, CA - introduced himself, said he was very excited to be the architect for the proposed Swenson residence, and gave a detailed presentation of the project. He answered the Commission's question regarding the pinnacle edge on the east side of the property and the proposed residence photo simulations. Commissioners Bettencourt, Fitzpatrick, and Chairperson Wilkinson said they individually met with the Architect, John Vuksic, prior to the meeting and visited the site on their own. Consultant Principal Planner Criste explained there were two Initial Studies circulated for this project. The first one proposed a larger dwelling than what was presented before the Commission tonight. The second one was circulated from December 30, 2015 through January 20, 2016 after the project was amended based on comments received by the Homeowners Association (HOA). The comments received and staffs responses to those PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 2 MARCH 8, 2016 comments are included as Exhibit A to the proposed resolution. She said the applicant is also subject to compliance to the HOA requirements outlined in the settlement agreement included as Attachment No. 7 to the staff report. Staff and Mr. Vuksic answered the Commission's questions regarding driveway length, parking, setbacks, and landscaping. Assistant City Attorney Molko stated that three additional comments were received after the agenda packet was prepared and disseminated. The comments were distributed to the Commission before the meeting, incorporated into the packet, and made available to the public. They included an opposition from Mr. Joseph McVeigh, and two support comments from Robert and Mary Lou Alfini and Jon Harnish. Public Speaker: The following speakers spoke in opposition of the Swenson residence within The Enclave Mountain Estates: 1. Sean McVeigh, La Quinta 2. Joseph McVeigh, La Quinta - deferred his 3 minutes to Sean McVeigh 3. Jay Baden, La Quinta - deferred his 3 minutes to Sean McVeigh 4. Anna Baden, La Quinta - deferred his 3 minutes to Sean McVeigh 5. Patti Mergener, La Quinta 6. Michael Mergener, La Quinta 7. Mary Urquhart, La Quinta 8. Patrick Pratt, Palm Desert - representing Mr. and Mrs. Urquhart residing at 48705 Via Sierra 9. Dan O'Conner, La Quinta 10.Gael Margarites, La Quinta 11. Bea Hollfelder, La Quinta - Gael Margarites read a letter authored by Bea Hollfelder 12.Chris Margarites, La Quinta 13. Beverly Testwuide, La Quinta 14. Bill Covery, La Quinta Public Speaker: The following speakers spoke in support of the Swenson residence within The Enclave Mountain Estates: 1. Cece Boger, La Quinta 2. David Boger, La Quinta - President of The Enclave Mountain Estates HOA 3. Ed Weisenheimer, La Quinta - submitted only written comments 4. Gloria Dodd, La Quinta 5. Michele Lissberger, La Quinta 6. John Lissberger, La Quinta 7. Richard Grund, La Quinta 8. Victory Grund, La Quinta 9. Marilyn Johnston, La Quinta 10. Hal Wright, La Quinta 11.John Rosling, La Quinta PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3 MARCH 8, 2016 Mr. Vuksic explained that story poles and strings were put up twice on the property to show the dimensions of the proposed dwelling. Notifications of the story poles were sent out and Mr. Vuksic gave a presentation on the site. He said he went to each property to examine visibility of the neighborhood properties. Public Speaker: Mr. Doug Franklin, President of the Altum Group, and the project's Civil Engineer - introduced himself and explained the inconsistency in the hydrology report brought up by Mr. McVeigh earlier was very minor with regards to offsite and onsite flows, which has been address. He drainage and retention system as designed will meet WQMP requirements. Chairperson Wilkinson declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 9:29 p.m. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Bette ncourt/Fitzpatrick to adopt Planning Resolution No. 2016-002 adopting Environmental Assessment 2013-630 and Mitigated Negative Declaration under the California Environmental Quality Act and approving Conditional Use Permit 2013-152 for the Swenson residence within The Enclave Mountain Estate. Motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Wilkinson called for a short recess. Chairperson Wilkinson reconvened the meeting at 9:43 p.m. with all Commissioners present. 2. Site Development Permit 2015-0006 submitted by PGA West II Residential Association, Inc. proposing the construction of a permanent parking lot, storage area, walls and landscaping improvements on approximately 0.5 acres. Project: PGA West. CEQA: exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15332 (Class 32) In -Fill Development Projects. Location: southern terminus of Interlachen at Hermitage, north of Avenue 58. Principal Planner Jay Wuu presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Design and Development Department. Staff addressed the Commission's questions with regards to certified landscape architect stamp requirements, emergency ingress and egress, and Fire Department's clearance and striping requirements. Chairperson Wilkinson declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 9:50 p.m. Public Speaker: Mr. Michael Rowe, Civil Engineer with MSA Consulting, Palm Desert, CA - introduced himself and gave a brief description of the project. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4 MARCH 8, 2016 Chairperson Wilkinson declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 9:51 p.m. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Bette ncourt/Fitzpatrick to adopt Planning Resolution No. 2016-003 approving Site Development Permit 2015-0006 for storage and parking areas for PGA West and deem the project exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15332 (Class 32) In -Fill Development Projects. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Sign Program Amendment 2015-0004 submitted by 3 Amigos Prop proposing a sign program amendment for the Point Happy Shopping Center. Project: Point Happy. CEQA: exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to provisions of Section 15311 (a) in that this proposal includes on -premise signs. Location: 78-468 Highway 111. Planning Manager Gabriel Perez presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Design and Development Department. Chairperson Wilkinson declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 9:59 p.m. Public Speaker: None Chairperson Wilkinson declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 9:59 p.m. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Blum/Wright to adopt Planning Resolution No. 2016-004 approving Sign Program Amendment 2015-0004 for the Point Happy Shopping Center and deem the project exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15311 (a) in that this project includes on -premise signs. Motion passed unanimously. 4. Continued from the March 22, 2016 meeting - Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2016- 0001 submitted by the City of La Quinta recommending that the City Council amend several chapters of Titles 2, 7, 8, 9, and 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, related to streamlining of the development review process. CEQA: Exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3), Review for Exemptions - General Rule. Planning Manager Gabriel Perez presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Design and Development Department. Chairperson Wilkinson declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 10:18 p.m. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Blum to adopt Planning Resolution No. 2016-005 recommending to the City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2016-0001 proposing amendment to several chapters of Titles 2, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5 MARCH 8, 2016 7, 8, 9, and 13 of the Municipal Code and deem the project exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3), Review for Exemptions - General Rule. Motion passed unanimously. BUSINESS SESSION 1. Recommend that the City Council amend the Planning Commission meeting start time from 7:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Planning Manager Perez presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Design and Development Department. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Wright/Bettencourt recommending to the City Council to change the Planning Commission meeting start time from 7:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. COMMISSIONER ITEMS 1. Commissioner Blum is scheduled to attend the March 15, 2016 City Council meeting. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Fitzpatrick/Blum to adjourn this meeting at 10:28 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, MONIKA RADEVA, Executive Assistant City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 6 MARCH 8, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, MARCH 22, 2016 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Chairperson Wilkinson. PRESENT: Commissioners Bettencourt, Fitzpatrick, Wright, and Chairperson Wilkinson ABSENT: Commissioner Blum STAFF PRESENT: Design and Development Director Tim Jonasson, Planning Manager Gabriel Perez, Principal Engineer Bryan McKinney, Executive Assistant Wanda Wise -Latta, and Executive Assistant Monika Radeva Commissioner Fitzpatrick led the Commission in the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENT Public Speaker: Mr. Walt Sorenson, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and spoke in opposition of Washington 50 project submitted by Chandi Group, USA and located at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50; (Site Development Permit 2015-0005). The project proposes the construction of a 52,000 square -foot commercial development, which consists of a 6,000 square -foot gas station with convenience store/deli and 4,000 square -foot car wash facility, two 3,000 square -foot drive -through restaurant pads, and two 18,000 square -foot office/retail buildings. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA - Confirmed PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Appeal 2016-0001 submitted by Mr. George Bushala seeking reversal of Design and Development Director's decision regarding the approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2015-0009 (TPM 36964) and Minor Adjustment 2016-0001. CEQA: categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Section 15315, Class 15 (Minor Land Divisions). Location: southeast corner of Calle Quito and Avenida La Jarita. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 1 MARCH 22, 2016 Planning Manager Gabriel Perez presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Chairperson Wilkinson declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 7:25 p.m. Public Speaker: Mr. George Bushala, Applicant, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and explained his reasoning for appealing the Director's approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2016-0001 (TPM 36964). He expressed disagreement with the staffs findings and recommendations as outlined in the staff report. Chairperson Wilkinson called for a short recess at 7:55 p.m. Chairperson Wilkinson reconvened the meeting at 8:03 p.m. with all Commissioners present. Public Speaker: Mr. Christian Servin, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and spoke in support of the appeal and requested the Planning Commission reverse the Director's approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2016-0009 (TPM 36964). Public Speaker: Mr. Rick Morris, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and said he is the owner of the appealed parcel. He said he has lived in the Coachella Valley for a long time and has been a builder in the community as well. He said he thinks this project will enhance the residential community. Chairperson Wilkinson declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 8:15 p.m. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Bettencourt/Fitzpatrick to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2016-006 denying Appeal 2016-0001 and upholding the Director's approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2015-0009 (TPM 36964) and Minor Adjustment 2016-0001. AYES: Commissioners Bettencourt, Fitzpatrick, Wright, and Chairperson Wilkinson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Blum. Motion passed. BUSINESS SESSION - None COMMISSIONER ITEMS - None DIRECTOR'S ITEMS 1. Planning Manager Perez said the Development Code Tune Up (Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2016-0001) will be presented to the City Council for review and consideration at the April 5, 2016 meeting. ADJOURNMENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 2 MARCH 22, 2016 There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Bettencourt/Fitzpatrick to adjourn this meeting at 8:24 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, MONIKA RADEVA, Executive Assistant City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3 MARCH 22, 2016 PH 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: APRIL 26, 2016 CASE NUMBER: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2015-0004 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2015-0001 ZONE CHANGE 2015-0002 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2015-0002 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 APPLICANT: CHANDI GROUP, USA PROPERTY OWNER: UHC 00217 LA QUINTA REQUEST: APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 FOR A 52,800 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CENTER ON 7.6 ACRES, AND A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. CEQA: THE PLANNING DIVISION HAS PREPARED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2015-0004 FOR THIS PROJECT, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE DIVISION HAS DETERMINED THAT ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WILL NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT BECAUSE OF THE MITIGATION MEASURES HAVE BEEN INCOPORATED. LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND AVENUE 50 RECOMMENDED ACTION Recommend to the City Council: 1. Adoption of Environmental Assessment 2015-0004; 2. Approval of General Plan Amendment 2015-0001 and Zone Change 2015-0002; 3. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2015-0007, Conditional Use Permit 2015- 0002, and Site Development Permit 2015-0005 subject to the Conditions of Approval. Page 1of8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • The Chandi Group, USA proposes the construction of a 52,800 square -foot commercial project (Project) on a 7.6 acre vacant parcel at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50 (Attachment 1). • The applicant requests Site Development Permit (SDP) approval for the Project, which includes a 6,000 square -foot gas station with convenience store/deli, a 4,800 square -foot car wash facility, a 2,300 square -foot drive through restaurant, a 3,700 square -foot stand-alone restaurant, and two, two-story office/retail buildings of 18,000 square feet each. • The applicant has revised the original site plan by removing the drive through lane from the southerly restaurant building site and consolidated the car wash facility and the convenience store into one building. BACKGROUND The project site (Attachment 2) consists of approximately 7.6 unimproved acres at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50. The property was previously entitled as part of the La Paloma senior residential community on November 7, 2004, that includes plans for 216 independent and assisted living units on both, the subject site and the vacant property at the northeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50. The subject site was to include 50 units of the senior residential community, but was removed from that plan under a Specific Plan (SP 2004-071, Amendment 1) and SDP amendment (SDP2003-762, Time Extension 4, Amendment 1) approved by the City Council on July 19, 2011. The La Paloma project included approval of the following land use modifications: • General Plan Amendment (GPA 2003-091) was approved changing the land use designation from Office Commercial to Medium/High Density Residential. • A Zone Change (ZC 2003-112) was approved changing the zoning designation from Office Commercial (CO) to Medium Density Residential (RM). PROPOSAL AND ANALYSIS Overview: The Project is a proposed commercial mixed -use development with retail, restaurant and office uses on a 7.6-acre site, located at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50 (Attachment 3), which includes: ✓ 10,800 square -foot ARCO AM/PM convenience store with delicatessen (6,000 square feet) and car wash (4,800 square feet) ✓ 2,300 square feet of drive -through fast food restaurant space ✓ 3,700 square -foot stand-alone fast food restaurant ✓ 36,000 square feet of commercial retail/office space on two pads (18,000 square feet each) Page 2of8 The Project provides 274 parking stalls and an additional 11 stalls along the east side of the car wash structure for the vacuuming area. The site is generally triangular and bounded by Washington Street, Avenue 50, and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. To the north, across Avenue 50, is a 15-acre vacant site approved for the La Paloma 208- unit assisted care living facility with 123 independent living beds, 73 assisting living beds, and 24 Alzheimer beds, and 40 cottage beds. To the southeast, across the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) channel, are existing homes (La Quinta Fairways) and to the west, across Washington Street, are existing residential neighborhoods (Montero Estates and Duna La Quinta). General Plan/ Zoninq Conformance: Existing Proposed General Plan Medium/High Density Residential General Commercial Zone Change Medium Density Residential Community Commercial The existing Medium/High Density General plan land us designation and Medium Density Residential zone is designed to accommodate a broad range of residential land uses, including small -lot subdivisions, duplex, condominium and apartment projects. The applicant proposes a General Plan Amendment (GPA) from Medium/High Density Residential to General Commercial and a Zone Change (ZC) from Medium Density Residential to Community Commercial (CC) Zone to allow for a full range of commercial uses that are proposed in the subject project such as convenience stores, restaurants, and professional offices (Attachment 4 and 5). A gas service station and a car wash are permitted in the CC zone with a CUP approval and compliance with the site location, operation and development standards set forth by the Municipal Code (Chapter 9.100.240 - Service station standards). The Project meets all of the applicable development standards for a gas service station and car wash. The Noise Analysis identified noise levels from the point of egress from the car wash that will exceed the nighttime noise limit of 50 dBA after 10 p.m. at the future La Paloma community. The CUP includes a condition of approval (COA) that limits car wash operations from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily. Staff did not provide a recommendation to the Planning Commission regarding the GPA and the ZC; the Municipal Code requires that findings be made by the City Council prior to their approval, which are included as Attachment 6. Tentative Parcel Map (TPM): The applicant proposes to subdivide the approximately 7.6-acre site into four parcels (TPM 37007): • Parcel 1: 2.34 acres (Combined Building 1 and 2) • Parcel 2: 2.99 acres (Buildings 5 and 6) • Parcel 3:.88 acres (Building 3) • Parcel 4:.83 acres (Building 4) Page 3of8 The proposed TPM is consistent with the City's Subdivision Regulations and the development standards of the CC zone subject to the COA. Site Design: The project site plan includes the ARCO AM/PM and car wash facility (combined Building 1 and 2) near the intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 50, with the two drive -through restaurant pads (Buildings 3 and 4) located along Washington Street (Attachment 3). There are 20 pumps (10 pump stations with 2 dispensing nozzles at each station). The two retail/office buildings (Buildings 5 and 6) are located along the CVWD drainage channel (Attachment 3, Sheet A0.1). The remainder of the site is designed for parking and pedestrian access. Drainage requirements are accommodated through an underground retention and pipe system, utilizing the drainage channel. Access points are provided on Washington Street and on Avenue 50; and a main drive aisle through the site that connects the two access points. These will not be signalized, and turn movements will be limited. Pedestrian access is provided from both Washington Street and Avenue 50 onto the site, as well as within the Project. The Project provides 274 parking spaces, plus 11 spaces along the car wash building for drying/vacuum use; and 274 are required. The parking spaces for drying/vacuum uses are proposed underneath an aluminum canopy and equipped with self -serve vacuums. Bicycle parking for the restaurant and office uses is required by the Municipal Code. Commercial trash enclosures are proposed for the building areas and placed to minimize visibility of openings from Washington Street and Avenue 50. The proposed on -site lighting is generally consistent with the City's outdoor lighting requirements (Attachment 3, Sheet A0.2) and it is accomplished by pole mounted lighting placed throughout the parking areas, which will be illuminated with partially - shielded light -emitting diode (LED) in a modern decorative -style fixture at a 20-foot pole height. The photometric plan shows an average of 1.7 foot-candles, the proposed lighting is within the allowable 1 to 2 foot-candle illumination level of the Municipal Code. Traffic Analysis: The Traffic Impact Analysis concluded that the Project development would not result in any potentially significant cumulative impacts to nearby intersections and road segments and the level of service will be unaffected. Hydrology: The site will be raised as part of the Project development. An internal flood control system has been designed to capture 100 year storm flows and direct them to an underground infiltration system located at the northeast portion of the site. Storm flows in excess of the 100 year storm would be directed to a secondary discharge, directly into the Evacuation Channel. An external storm drain system will be constructed to convey the off -site street tributary area drainage. The Project will be Page 4of8 required to develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), which specifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent all construction pollutants from remaining in storm water and with the intent The Project's storm water drainage plan will be submitted prior to construction to ensure impacts to local drainage are reduced to less than significant levels. All hydrology improvements will be required to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards, to assure that no polluted storm water enters other surface waters either during construction or operation of the Project. Architectural Design: The building designs reflect a contemporary architectural theme, similar to many of the recent commercial building approvals in the City (Attachment 3, Sheets A1.1 - A5.2). Architectural elements include the use of tower features with copper metal roofs (pitched and flat), metal parapet roof coping, textured and painted stucco with stone accent walls, and a subdued earth -tone color palette. All five buildings reflect a similar design and color treatment, though the car wash structure and gas canopy do not incorporate tower elements. Staff has no concerns with the architectural aspects of the Project. Roof heights vary depending on the buildings; Buildings 1 - 4, which include the ARCO AM/PM store, car wash and the two drive -through buildings, incorporate a main flat roof parapet line at 19.0 feet in height; the fueling area canopy is shown at 18.5 feet high. The table below identifies the height statistics for each building: Combined BLDG 3 BLDG 4 BLDG 5and6 BLDG 1 & 2 Drive Restaurant Office/Retail AM/PM and Through Car Wash Main roof line 19' 0" 19' 0" 19' 0" 30' 6" End tower(s) 26' 6" 28' 6" 26' 6" 40' 0" Main tower 32' 2" 22' 0" 22' 0" 40' 0" Buildings 5 and 6 (two-story retail/office) provide the most variation in roofline and architectural projection. Heights vary between 30.5 feet along the main ridge line, to 40.0 feet for the tower features at the main building entrance and interior end locations (Attachment 4, Sheet A5.2). The applicant requests to rezone the site from RM to CC, which will increase the height limit from 28 feet to 40 feet. The Project is subject to a height restriction of 22 feet and a one-story building for all structures within 150 feet of Washington Street and Avenue 50. The height restriction affects the ARCO AM/PM (combined Building 1 and 2), as wells as the drive -through restaurant and stand-alone restaurant (Buildings 3 Page 5of8 and 4). However, the Municipal Code allows architectural features not containing usable floor space, such as towers, gables and spires, to extend 15 feet above the maximum structure height if approved as part of a SDP. The Municipal Code requires that the aggregate floor or "footprint" area not exceed 10% of the overall floor area of the structure. The tower elements meet this requirement and can extend up to 37 feet. As the site is vacant, there will be some visual impact on the existing La Quinta Fairways residential development to the southeast, across the CVWD channel. The rear elevations of the two-story office/retail building face toward these residences. A berm and several palm trees are proposed along the channel line behind the two buildings. However, staff recommends the Project provide a minimum five-foot block wall with El Dorado stone finish. The wall will help screen the rear man doors and back of house activities associated with the ground floor retail uses along the rear elevations (Attachment 3). Landscaping: Landscaping throughout the Project consists of primarily desert and other low to moderate water use plants (Attachment 3, Sheet L-1.0 - L2.0). The proposed tree palette includes Date Palms, Palo Verde, Chilean Mesquite, and Desert Willow. The shrub palette includes Agave species, Ocotillo, Red Yucca, Lantana, and Bougainvillea, among others. The landscape concept does not propose any turf. The perimeter areas along Washington Street and Avenue 50 are proposed to be landscaped with numerous trees, shrubs, and groundcover (24-inch box trees; minimum five -gallon shrubs/groundcover). The assorted species of plants add character to the Project and provide sufficient screening and accents around the vehicular and pedestrian circulation areas. The planted areas proposed around the buildings provide visual relief, as well as pedestrian -friendly amenities. The perimeter and parking lot landscaping will adequately screen the parking areas from adjacent streets, while providing visual and shade relief within the parking lot. COMMISSIONS/BOARD/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS On December 16, 2015, the Architectural and Landscaping Review Board (ALRB) recommended Project approval subject to landscape, architectural and site modifications (Attachment 7). On April 6, 2016, the ALRB considered the Project a second time to review new architectural and site modifications and recommended Project approval (Attachment 8). The Board discussed project colors and landscaping, and recommended as conditions of approval. Page 6of8 AGENCY & PUBLIC REVIEW Public Agency Review: This request was sent to all applicable City departments and affected public agencies on September 1, 2016. All written comments received are on file and available for review at the Design and Development Department. All applicable comments have been adequately addressed and/or incorporated in the recommended COAs. SB-18 Native American Tribal Consultation: As per SB-18 (2004) consultation requirements, information regarding the proposed GPA was forwarded to those Tribes referenced on the Tribal Consultation List provided by the Native American Heritage Commission. Staff has followed up with all Tribes requesting information or consultation and placed their recommendations for monitoring in the COAs. Public Notice: This Project was advertised in The Desert Sun newspaper on April 13, 2016, and mailed to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the site and is beyond the 500 foot radius notification required by the Municipal Code. To date the Planning Division has received 790 petition signatures, and 163 letters/emails opposed to the project. The Planning Division has received 1,489 petition signatures and 286 letters/emails in support of the project. The general concerns expressed through all correspondence in opposition to the Project are as follows: 1) Increase in vehicle traffic generated by the proposed project. 2) Land use compatibility of the proposed commercial use with the surrounding residential land uses. 3) Proximity of the Project to the Harry Truman Elementary School, La Quinta Middle School, Boys and Girls Club, and the YMCA 4) Noise impacts 5) Hydrology 6) Crime 7) Aesthetic Impacts, particularly from residents of the Fairways neighborhood. 8) The proposed project may inhibit future economic development in the Village District ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Division has prepared Environmental Assessment (EA) 2015-0004 for this project, in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A previous EA 2003-470 was prepared for the La Paloma development for the Project site and a mitigated negative declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council. The Initial Study for EA 2015-0004 was distributed to the City's responsible agencies, and to a number of parties who had requested the document. The Initial Study is attached to this staff report (Attachment 9). The 20-day comment period began on Page 7of8 April 13, 2016 and ends on May 2, 2016. Primary concerns expressed by commenters included hydrology, traffic, and air quality. The comment letters are also provided in their entirety. The Division has determined that although the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect because mitigation measures have been incorporated. Prepared by: Gabriel Perez, Planning Manager Approved by: Timothy R. Jonasson, PE, Director of Design and Development Director/ City Engineer Attachments: 1. Project Information 2. Project Area Site Map 3. Washington 50 Plan Set 4. GPA Exhibit 5. ZC Exhibit 6. Findings for GP, ZC, TPM, CUP, and SDP 7. Minutes of December 16, 2015 ALRB meeting 8. Minutes from April 6, 2016 ALRB meeting 9. EA 2015-0004 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 1 of 26 GENERAL The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Village Use Permit, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Site Development Permit 2015-0005 shall comply with all applicable conditions for the following related approval(s): Environmental Assessment 2015-0004 General Plan Amendment 2015-0001 Zone Change 2015-0002 Site Development Permit 2015-0005 Tentative Parcel Map 2015-0007 (Tentative Parcel Map 37007) Conditional Use Permit 2015-0002 In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of these approvals, the Director of Design and Development shall adjudicate the conflict by determining the precedence. The Site Development Permit shall expire two years from City Council approval and shall become null and void in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.200.080, unless a building permit has been issued. A time extension may be requested per LQMC Section 9.200.080. 4. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies, if required: • Riverside County Fire Marshal • La Quinta Public Works Development Division (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) Exemption Form - Whitewater River Region, Improvement Permit) • Design and Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 2 of 26 • Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) • State Water Resources Control Board • SunLine Transit Agency (SUNLINE) • South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley (SCAQMD) The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When these requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. 5. Coverage under the State of California Construction General Permit must be obtained by the applicant; who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's ("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NOI") and Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number to the City prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES r discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Colorado River Basin Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011 and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP") to the State Water Resources Control Board. The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. C. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 3 of 26 Management Practices ("BMPs") (LQMC Section 8.70.020 (Definitions)): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. The SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City Council. F. The owner shall execute and record an agreement that provides for the perpetual maintenance and operation of all post -construction BMPs as required. 7. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Development Impact Fee and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee programs in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). 8. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the invoice, all costs and actual attorney's fees incurred by the City Attorney to review, negotiate and/or modify any documents or instruments required by these conditions, if Developer requests that the City modify or revise any documents or instruments prepared initially by the City to effect these conditions. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer's failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. 9. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the invoice, all costs and actual consultant's fees incurred by the City for engineering and/or surveying consultants to review and/or modify any documents or instruments required by this project. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer's failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 4 of 26 10. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. Said conferred rights shall also include grant of access easement to the City of La Quinta for the purpose of graffiti removal by City staff or assigned agent in perpetuity and agreement to the method to remove graffiti and to paint over to best match existing. The applicant shall establish the aforementioned requirements in the CC&R's for the development or other agreements as approved by the City Engineer. 11. Pursuant to the aforementioned condition, conferred rights shall include approvals from the master developer or the HOA over easements and other property rights necessary for construction and proper functioning of the proposed development not limited to access rights over proposed and/or existing private streets that access public streets and open space/drainage facilities of the master development. 12. The applicant shall offer for dedication all public street rights -of -way in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, site development permit, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 13. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Washington Street (Major Arterial) - Three eleven -foot (11') thru lanes and one eleven -foot (11') left turn lane except for: A. Additional right of way dedication to accommodate a four - foot (4') bike lane, a twelve -foot (12') deceleration/right turn only lane, and a fifteen -foot (15') parkway or as approved by the City Engineer. 2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - Two minimum eleven -foot (11') thru lanes except for: A. Additional right of way dedication to accommodate a four - foot (4') bike lane, a twelve -foot (12') deceleration/right turn only lane at the Avenue 50 entry, and a fifteen -foot (15') parkway or as approved by the City Engineer. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 5 of 26 14. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. Pursuant to this requirement, the Applicant shall include in the submittal packet containing the rough grading plans submitted for plan checking, an offsite street geometric layout, drawn at 1" equals 40 feet, detailing the following design aspects: median curb line, outside curb line, lane line alignment including lane widths, left turn lanes, deceleration lane(s) and bus stop turnout(s). The geometric layout shall be accompanied with sufficient professional engineering studies to confirm the appropriate length of all proposed turn pockets and auxiliary lanes that may impact the right of way dedication required of the project and the associated landscape setback requirement. 15. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right- of-way shown on the approved Site Development Permit are necessary prior to approval of the improvements dedicating such right-of-way, the applicant shall grant the necessary right-of-way within 60 days of a written request by the City. 16. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public rights - of -way as follows: A. Washington Street (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 17. At locations where the onsite finished grade adjacent to the landscaped setback lot has an elevation differential with respect to the arterial street top of curb exceeding 11.0 feet, the applicant shall comply with, and accommodate, the maximum slope gradients in the parkway/setback area and meandering sidewalk requirements by either: 1) increasing the landscape setback size as needed, or 2) installing retaining walls between the sidewalk and the back of the landscaped area as needed. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 6 of 26 18. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 19. Direct vehicular access to Washington Street and Avenue 50 from lots with frontage along Washington Street and Avenue 50 is restricted, except for those access points identified on the Site Development Permit, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. 20. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 21. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property after the date of approval of the Site Development Permit unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 22. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access for Individual Properties and Development) for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 23. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations that will convey water without ponding, and provide lateral containment of dust and residue during street sweeping operations. If a wedge or rolled curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be near vertical with a 1/8" batter and a minimum height of 0.1'. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to standard curb height prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. 24. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Washington Street (Major Arterial): Widen the east side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the project boundary to its ultimate width on the east side as specified in the General Plan and/or the requirements of these conditions. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 7 of 26 arterial design standard. Additional street width shall be provided to accommodate: a) Three eleven -foot (11') thru lanes. b) An eleven -foot (11') left turn lane for northbound Washington Street to westbound Avenue 50. c) A four -foot (4') bike lane. d) A twelve -foot (12') deceleration/right turn only lane at the Washington Street Primary Entry to the Avenue 50 intersection or as determined by the City Engineer. Other required improvements in the Washington Street right-of-way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: e) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. f) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that either touches the back of curb or approaches within five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. 2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial): Widen the south side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the project boundary to its ultimate width on the south side as specified in the General Plan and/or the requirements of these conditions. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design standard. Additional street width shall be provided to accommodate: a) Two minimum eleven -foot (11') thru lanes. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 8 of 26 b) A four -foot (4') bike lane. c) A twelve -foot (12') deceleration/right turn only lane at the Avenue 50 project entry or as determined by the City Engineer. Other required improvements in the Avenue 50 right-of-way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: d) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. e) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk or as approved by the city Engineer. The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that either touches the back of curb or approaches within five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. f) A 12-foot wide raised landscaped median plus variable width as needed to accommodate the off -site street improvements associated with the development on the north side (La Paloma). Interim and ultimate improvements shall be as approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall be responsible for 50% of the cost to design and construct said raised landscaped median. The landscaped median improvements may be eligible for reimbursement from the City's Development Impact Fee fund in accordance with policies established for that program. Since the Avenue 50 street improvements are contingent upon CVWD dedicating the land to the applicant, the applicant is hereby notified that future site modifications may be necessary including, but not limited to site layout, buildings, and street reconfiguration. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the project boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 9 of 26 devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. The applicant is responsible for construction of all improvements mentioned above. B. INTERNAL STREETS 1) Construct internal streets per the approved Site Development Permit Preliminary Grading Exhibit and as approved by the City Engineer. Minimum street width shall be 26 feet except at the entry accessway. On -street parking shall be prohibited except in designated parking stall areas. The applicant shall make provisions for perpetual enforcement of the No Parking restrictions. 2) The location of driveways shall not be located within the curb return when possible. C. KNUCKLE 1) Construct the knuckle to conform to the lay -out shown in the Site Development Permit, except for minor revisions as may be required by the City Engineer. 25. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows or the approved equivalents of alternate materials: Parking Lot & Aisles (Low Traffic) 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Parking Lot & Aisles (High Traffic) 4.5" a.c./5.5" c.a.b. Primary Arterial 4.5" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. Major Arterial 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b. Concrete pavement shall be per City Standard 200 or per Geotechnical Report recommendations. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 10 of 26 26. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 27. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry (Washington Street): Right turn movements in and out are allowed. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. B. Primary Entry (Avenue 50): Right turn in and out and left turn movements in are allowed. Left turn movements out are prohibited. 28. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 29. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. 30. Standard knuckles and corner cut -backs shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 31. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and in particular the following: A. The parking stall and aisle widths and the double hairpin stripe parking stall design shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150. B. Cross slopes should be a maximum of 2% where ADA accessibility is required including accessibility routes between buildings. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 11 of 26 C. Building access points shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans to evaluate ADA accessibility issues. D. Accessibility routes to public streets and adjacent development shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plan. E. Parking stall lengths shall be according to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and be a minimum of 18 feet in length with a 2-foot overhang for all parking stalls or as approved by the City Engineer. One van accessible handicapped parking stall is required per 6 handicapped parking stalls. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, ADA accessibility route to public streets and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths and other improvements as may be determined by the City Engineer. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 32. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans). 33. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Design and Development Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. On -Site Rough Grading Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal B. PM10 Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal C. WQMP (Plan submitted in Report Form) NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 12 of 26 D. On -Site Precise Grading Plan 1" = 30' Horizontal E. Off -Site Street Improvement/Storm Drain Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal, 1" = 4' Vertical F. Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal The Off -Site street improvement plans shall have separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area. G. On -Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal, 1"= 4' Vertical NOTE: D through G to be submitted concurrently. (Separate Storm Drain Plans if applicable) H. Off -Site Median Landscaping Plans 1" = 40' Horizontal Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans and/or as approved by the Design and Development Department. "Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. "On -Site Precise Grading" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, wall elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 13 of 26 34. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the "Plans, Notes and Design Guidance" section of the Public Works Development Division at the City website (www.la-quinta.org). Please navigate to the Design and Development Department home page and look for the Standard Drawings hyperlink. 35. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the mylars of all approved improvement plans acceptable to the City Engineer. 36. Upon completion of construction, and prior to final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all approved mylars previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. The applicant shall employ or retain the Engineer Of Record during the construction phase of the project so that the FOR can make site visits in support of preparing "Record Drawing". However, if subsequent approved revisions have been approved by the City Engineer and reflect said "Record Drawing" conditions, the Engineer Of Record may submit a letter attesting to said fact to the City Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 37. Prior to constructing any off -site improvements on Washington Street and Avenue 50, the applicant deposit securities equivalent to both a Performance and labor & Material Bonds each valued at 100% of the cost of the off -site improvements required on Washington Street and Avenue 50. 38. In the event the applicant fails to construct the improvements for the development, or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, pursuant to the approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of all permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. 39. Depending on the timing of the development of this Site Development Permit, and the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to: A. Construct certain off -site improvements. B. Construct additional off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 14 of 26 of its costs by others. C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are considered to be an obligation of this site development permit. D. Secure the costs for future improvements that are to be made by others. E. To agree to any combination of these actions, as the City may require. Off -Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The applicant shall complete Off -Site Improvements in the first phase of construction. In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of the Final Map, or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the costs of such improvements. 40. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off - site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be approved by the City Engineer. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost estimates. Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements. GRADING 41. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements). 42. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 43. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 15 of 26 A. A grading plan prepared by a civil engineer registered in the State of California, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by an engineer registered in the State of California, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with LQMC Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with LQMC Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls). E. WQMP prepared by an engineer registered in the State of California. All grading shall conform with the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by soils engineer, or engineering geologist registered in the State of California. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. Additionally, the applicant shall replenish said security if expended by the City of La Quinta to comply with the Plan as required by the City Engineer. 44. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 45. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six feet (6') of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 46. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 16 of 26 approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the preliminary grading plan, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. The pad elevations shall be a minimum of one foot above the 100-year storm water surface. 47. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus half of a foot (0.5') from the elevations shown on the approved Site Development Permit Site Plan, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Engineer for a substantial conformance finding review. 48. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor with applicable compaction tests and over excavation documentation. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 49. If permitted by CVWD and the City Engineer, when an applicant proposes discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, the applicant shall execute an indemnification instrument as approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney. Additionally, the applicant shall pay for all costs of sampling and testing associated with the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The applicant is required to construct required discharge treatment Best Management Practice facilities per the NPDES Permit Supplement A but at a minimum shall install a CDS Unit or equal system as approved by the City Engineer. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative parcel map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions for meeting these obligations. The 100-year storm water hydraulic grade line shall be as determined by CVWD and the City Engineer. Additionally, the applicant shall submit verification to the City of CVWD PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 17 of 26 acceptance of the proposed discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel with the initial submittal of storm drain improvement plans. 50. Verification of the proposed storm water retention system is subject to review and approval by the Coachella Valley Water District and the City Engineer. If in the event, the proposed retention capacity or pass through storm water flow is found to be inadequate during final design, the Applicant shall revise what is currently proposed in the preliminary hydrology study and make adjustments to the site layout as needed to accommodate the increased retention/detention or pass through capacity required to satisfy safety issues of the Design and Development Department and CVWD. Pursuant to the aforementioned, the applicant may be required to construct additional underground and above ground drainage facilities to convey on site and off site stormwater as well as stormwater from adjacent terrain by the La Quinta Evacuation Channel that historically flows onto and/or through the project site. The applicant shall be required to construct concrete channel lining of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel adjacent to the project boundary as required by the Design and Development Department and CVWD. The concrete lining shall be stained to match the existing channel and/or covered with soil and stabilized with vegetation as approved by CVWD. 51. The applicant shall upsize the existing storm drain improvements or construct a parallel storm drain system to collect the off -site half -street tributary flows on Washington Street and Avenue 50 fronting the project boundary and discharge into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel as approved by CVWD and the City Engineer. 52. If the development is not able to discharge storm or nuisance water from the project into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, the applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), Retention Basin Design Criteria, Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. More specifically, stormwater falling on site and including the off -site half street tributary areas during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The design storm shall be either the 1 hour, 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 53. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 18 of 26 54. In design of retention facilities, the maximum infiltration rate shall be two inches per hour. The infiltration rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise and as approved by the City Engineer. 55. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 56. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the City Engineer. 57. For on -site above ground common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems. Side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. Additionally, retention basin widths shall be not less than 20 feet at the bottom of the basin. 58. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to LQMC Section 9.100.040(B)(7). 59. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries and levels in any area outside the development. 60. 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. 61. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 62. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions for post construction runoff per the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011. A. For post -construction urban runoff from New Development and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 19 of 26 Redevelopments Projects, the applicant shall implement requirements of the NPDES permit for the design, construction and perpetual operation and maintenance of BMPs per the approved Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the project as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011. B. The applicant shall implement the WQMP Design Standards per (CRWQCB- CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011 utilizing BMPs approved by the City Engineer. A project specific WQMP shall be provided which incorporates Site Design and Treatment BMPs utilizing first flush infiltration as a preferred method of NPDES Permit Compliance for Whitewater River receiving water, as applicable. C. The developer shall execute and record a Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Agreement that provides for the perpetual maintenance and operation of stormwater BMPs. 63. The applicant shall install suitable facilities along the westerly boundary of the project to preserve CVWD access and prohibit access to the right-of-way of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. Additionally, the applicant shall work with CVWD to construct a perpetual maintenance access to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel as required by CVWD and approved by the City Engineer. UTILITIES 64. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 (Utilities). 65. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 66. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 67. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 20 of 26 trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. Additionally, grease traps and the maintenance thereof shall be located as to not conflict with access aisles/entrances. 68. Utility easements in favor of CVWD shall be clear of any obstructions including overhead obstructions. CONSTRUCTION 69. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly - maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION 70. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans). 71. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 72. All new and modified landscape areas shall have landscaping and permanent irrigation improvements in compliance with the City's Water Efficient Landscape regulations contained in LQMC Section 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscape). 73. The applicant shall submit the final landscape plans for review, processing and approval to the Design and Development Department, in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan application process. When plan checking has been completed by the planning staff, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the Planning Manager. Approval of the final landscape plans is required prior to issuance of the first building permit unless the Planning Manager determines extenuating circumstances exist which justifies an alternative processing schedule. Landscape plans for landscaped medians on public streets shall be approved by both the Planning Manager and the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by both the Planning Manager and/or City Engineer. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 21 of 26 74. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance requirements per guidelines in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 5th Edition" or latest, in the design and/or installation of all landscaping and appurtenances abutting and within the private and public street right-of-way. PUBLIC SERVICES 75. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer. MAINTENANCE 76. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance). 77. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of perimeter landscaping up to the curb, access drives, sidewalks, and stormwater BMPs. FEES AND DEPOSITS 78. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits). These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. FIRE DEPARTMENT 79. The required fire flow shall be available from 4 Super hydrant(s) (6" x 4" x 21/2" x 21/2") spaced not more than 350 apart and shall be capable of delivering a fire flow 2125 GPM per minute for two hours duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the construction site. 80. The minimum dimension for gates is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width and a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height. Any gate providing access from a road shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road. Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate entrance, a 38- foot turning radius shall be used. 81. Where required, fire apparatus access roads shall have approved signs or other PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 22 of 26 approved notices or markings that include the words NO PARKING -FIRE LANE. The means by which fire lanes are designated shall be maintained in a clean and legible conditions at all times and be replaced or repaired when necessary to provide adequate visibility. 82. Prior to building plan approval and construction, applicant/developer shall furnish two copies of the water system fire hydrant plans to Fire Department for review and approval. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, and shall confirm hydrant type, location, spacing, and minimum fire flow. Once plans are signed and approved by the local water authority, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Department for review and approval. 83. Prior to issuance of building permits, the water system for fire protection must be provided as approved by the Fire Department and the local water authority. 84. Blue dot retro-reflector pavement markers shall be located on private streets, public streets and driveways to indicate location of the fire hydrant per standard number 06-05 (located at www.rvcfire.org) 85. Fire Apparatus access road shall be in compliance with the Riverside County Fire Department Standard number 06-05 (located at www.rvcfire.org). Access lanes will not have an up, or downgrade of more than 15%. Access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance not less than 13 feet and 6 inches. Access lanes will be designed to withstand the weight of 60 thousand pounds over 2 axles. Access will have a turning radius capable of accommodating fire apparatus. Access lane shall be constructed with a surface so as to provide all weather driving capabilities. 86. An approved Fire Department access key lock box (Minimum Knox Box 3200 series model) shall be installed next to the approved Fire Department access door to the building. If the buildings are protected with an alarm system, the lock box shall be required to have tampered monitoring. Required order forms and installation standards may be obtained at the Fire Department. 87. Display street numbers in a prominent location on the address side of building(s) and/or rear access if applicable. Numbers and letters shall be a minimum of 12" in height for building(s) up to 25' in height. In complexes with alpha designations, letter size must match numbers. All addressing must be legible, of a contrasting color, and adequately illuminated to be visible from street at all hours. 88. Install a complete commercial fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler system(s) with pipe sizes in excess of 4" in diameter will require the project Structural Engineer to certify with a "wet signature", that the structural system is designed to support PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 23 of 26 the seismic and gravity loads to support the additional weight of the sprinkler system. All fire sprinkler risers shall be protected from any physical damage. 89. The PIV and FCD shall be located to the front of building within 50 feet of approved roadway and within 200 feet of an approved hydrant. Sprinkler riser room must have indicating exterior and/or interior door signs. A C-16 licensed contactor must submit plans, along with current permit fees, to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to installation. 90. Install an alarm monitoring system for fire sprinkler system(s) with 20 or more heads, along with current permit fees, to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to installation. 91. Install a portable fire extinguisher, with a minimum rating of 2A-10BC, for every 3,000 sq. ft. and/or 75 feet of travel distance. Fire extinguishers shall be mounted 3.5 to 5 ft above finished floor, measured to the top of the extinguisher. Where not readily visible, signs shall be posted above all extinguishers to indicate their locations. Extinguishers must have current CSFM service tags affixed. 92. No hazardous materials shall be stored and/or used within the building, which exceeds quantities listed in 2010 CBC. No class I, II or IIIA of combustible/flammable liquid shall be used in any amount in the building. 93. Exit designs, exit signs, door hardware, exit markers, exit doors, and exit path marking shall be installed per the 2010 California Building Code. 94. Electrical room doors if applicable shall be posted "ELECTRICAL ROOM" on outside of door. 95. Fire Alarm Control Panel room doors if applicable shall be posted "FACP" on outside of door. 96. Fire Riser Sprinkler room doors if applicable shall be posted "Fire Riser" on outside of door. 97. Roof Access room door if applicable shall be posted "Roof Access" on outside of door. 98. Access shall be provided to all mechanical equipment located on the roof as required by the Mechanical Code. 99. Air handling systems supplying air in excess of 2000 cubic feet per minute to enclosed spaces within buildings shall be equipped with an automatic shutoff. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 24 of 26 2010 CMC. 100. Gate(s) shall be automatic or manual operated. Install Knox key operated switches, with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox Company. Building plans shall include mounting location/position and operating standards for Fire Department approval. 101. The Proposed project may have a cumulative adverse impact on the Fire Department's ability to provide an acceptable level of service. These impacts include an increase in the number of emergency and public service calls due to the increased presence of structures, traffic and population. The project proponents/developers will be expected to provide for a proportional mitigation to these impacts via capitol improvements and/or impact fees. 102. Nothing in our review shall be construed as encompassing structural integrity. Review of this plan does not authorize or approve any omission or deviation from all applicable regulations. Final approval is subject to plan review and field inspection. All questions regarding the meaning of the code requirements should be referred to Fire Department at 760-863-8886. 103. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provision for the turn around capabilities of fire apparatus. 104. Driveway loops, fire apparatus access lanes and entrance curb radius should be designed to adequately allow access of emergency fire vehicles. The applicant or developer shall include in the building plans the required fire lanes and include the appropriate lane printing and/or signs. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION 105. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans). All landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 106. All new landscape areas shall have landscaping and permanent irrigation improvements in compliance with the City's Water Efficient Landscape regulations contained in LQMC Section 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscape). 107. The applicant shall submit final landscape plans for review, processing and approval to the Community Development Department, in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan application process. Community Development Director approval of the final landscape plans is required prior to issuance of the first building permit unless the Director determines extenuating circumstances exist PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 25 of 26 which justify an alternative processing schedule. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the appropriate City official, including the Community Development Director and/or City Engineer. Prior to final approval of the installation of landscaping, the Landscape Architect of record shall provide the Community Development Department a letter stating he/she has personally inspected the installation and that it conforms with the final landscaping plans as approved by the City. If staff determines during final landscaping inspection that adjustments are required in order to meet the intent of the Planning Commission's approval, the Community Development Director shall review and approve any such revisions to the landscape plan. 108. All landscaping shall consist of, at minimum, 36" box trees (i.e., a minimum 2.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade level after planting), 5-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. Double lodge poles (two-inch diameter) shall be used to brace and stake trees. 109. A minimum 48" box equivalent for all trees in the Washington and Avenue 50 perimeter parkways, and along the CVWD channel, shall be provided. All Date Palm trees shall be installed at a minimum 18 foot brown trunk height (BTH). 110. A minimum 5-foot high block wall shall be provided along the project frontage at the CVWD channel. The wall shall incorporate the El Dorado stone finish used throughout the project to retain a consistent appearance. 111. Screening of parking areas, drive through and gas station uses shall be provided in accordance with the applicable sections of the La Quinta Municipal Code. MISCELLANEOUS 112. The site shall be monitored during on- and off -site trenching and rough grading by Native American monitors. Proof of retention of monitors shall be given to the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving or clearing permit. If buried cultural materials are discovered during any earth -moving operations associated with the project, all work in that area shall be halted or diverted until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the finds, and if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Agua Caliente Tribal Historic Preservation Office. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 26 of 26 113. Collected archaeological artifacts shall be properly prepared for long term curation, meeting the Secretary of Interior Standards and Guidelines for curation, and shall be properly curated at a curation facility meeting Secretary of Interior Standards and Guidelines for curation prior to issuance of first Certificate of Occupancy for the property. Materials shall be accompanied by descriptive catalogue, field notes and records, primary research data, and the original graphics. 114. The County Coroner shall be contacted if human remains are identified during earthmoving activities. If the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted. The NAHC will make a determination of the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The City and the landowner will work with the designated MLD to determine the final disposition of the remains. 115. A qualified paleontologist shall monitor site disturbing activities, particularly at depths of 4 feet or more. The paleontologist shall be empowered to stop and/or redirect construction activities if a resource is uncovered; investigate the resource; curate the resource if necessary; and direct when construction activities can resume at and around the resource. 116. No signage is permitted with this approval. A separate permit from the Design and Development Department is required for any temporary or permanent signs. 117. A program and system for recycling of used car wash water shall be implemented and approved by the Design and Development Director. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 1 of 21 GENERAL The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Tentative Parcel Map, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. This Tentative Parcel Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code §66410 through §66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC"). The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.la-quinta.org. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies, if required: • Riverside County Fire Marshal • La Quinta Public Works Development Division (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP) Exemption Form - Whitewater River Region, Improvement Permit) • Design and Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) • State Water Resources Control Board • SunLine Transit Agency (SUNLINE) • South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley (SCAQMD) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 2 of 21 The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When these requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. 4. Coverage under the State of California Construction General Permit must be obtained by the applicant; who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's ("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NOI") and Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number to the City prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. 5. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES r discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Colorado River Basin Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011 and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP") to the State Water Resources Control Board. The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. C. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (LQMC Section 8.70.020 (Definitions)): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 3 of 21 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. The SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City Council. F. The owner shall execute and record an agreement that provides for the perpetual maintenance and operation of all post -construction BMPs as required. 6. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Development Impact Fee and Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee programs in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). 7. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the invoice, all costs and actual attorney's fees incurred by the City Attorney to review, negotiate and/or modify any documents or instruments required by these conditions, if Developer requests that the City modify or revise any documents or instruments prepared initially by the City to effect these conditions. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer's failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. 8. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the invoice, all costs and actual consultant's fees incurred by the City for engineering and/or surveying consultants to review and/or modify any documents or instruments required by this project. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer's failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS 9. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. Said conferred rights shall also include grant of access easement to the City of La Quinta for the purpose of graffiti removal by City staff or assigned agent in perpetuity and agreement to the method to remove graffiti and to paint over to best match existing. The applicant shall establish the aforementioned PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 4 of 21 requirements in the CC&R's for the development or other agreements as approved by the City Engineer. 10. Pursuant to the aforementioned condition, conferred rights shall include approvals from the master developer or the HOA over easements and other property rights necessary for construction and proper functioning of the proposed development not limited to access rights over proposed and/or existing private streets that access public streets and open space/drainage facilities of the master development. 11. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street rights -of - way in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 12. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Washington Street (Major Arterial) - Three eleven -foot (11') thru lanes and one eleven -foot (11') left turn lane except for: A. Additional right of way dedication to accommodate a four - foot (4') bike lane, a twelve -foot (12') deceleration/right turn only lane, and a fifteen -foot (15') parkway or as approved by the City Engineer. 2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - Two minimum eleven -foot (11') thru lanes except for: A. Additional right of way dedication to accommodate a four - foot (4') bike lane, a twelve -foot (12') deceleration/right turn only lane at the Avenue 50 entry, and a fifteen -foot (15') parkway or as approved by the City Engineer. 13. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. Pursuant to this requirement, the Applicant shall include in the submittal packet containing the rough grading plans submitted for plan checking, an offsite street geometric layout, drawn at 1" equals 40 feet, detailing the following design aspects: median curb line, outside curb line, lane line alignment including lane PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 5 of 21 widths, left turn lanes, deceleration lane(s) and bus stop turnout(s). The geometric layout shall be accompanied with sufficient professional engineering studies to confirm the appropriate length of all proposed turn pockets and auxiliary lanes that may impact the right of way dedication required of the project and the associated landscape setback requirement. 14. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right- of-way shown on the approved Tentative Parcel Map are necessary prior to approval of the improvements dedicating such right-of-way, the applicant shall grant the necessary right-of-way within 60 days of a written request by the City. 15. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public rights - of -way as follows: A. Washington Street (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 16. At locations where the onsite finished grade adjacent to the landscaped setback lot has an elevation differential with respect to the arterial street top of curb exceeding 11.0 feet, the applicant shall comply with, and accommodate, the maximum slope gradients in the parkway/setback area and meandering sidewalk requirements by either: 1) increasing the landscape setback size as needed, or 2) installing retaining walls between the sidewalk and the back of the landscaped area as needed. 17. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 18. Direct vehicular access to Washington Street and Avenue 50 from lots with frontage along Washington Street and Avenue 50 is restricted, except for those access points identified on the tentative parcel map, or as otherwise conditioned PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 6 of 21 in these conditions of approval. 19. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 20. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative Parcel Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 21. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access for Individual Properties and Development) for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 22. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations that will convey water without ponding, and provide lateral containment of dust and residue during street sweeping operations. If a wedge or rolled curb design is approved, the lip at the flowline shall be near vertical with a 1/8" batter and a minimum height of 0.1'. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to standard curb height prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. 23. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Washington Street (Major Arterial): Widen the east side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the project boundary to its ultimate width on the east side as specified in the General Plan and/or the requirements of these conditions. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design standard. Additional street width shall be provided to accommodate: a) Three eleven -foot (11') thru lanes. b) An eleven -foot (11') left turn lane for northbound Washington PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 7 of 21 Street to westbound Avenue 50. c) A four -foot (4') bike lane. d) A twelve -foot (12') deceleration/right turn only lane at the Washington Street Primary Entry to the Avenue 50 intersection or as determined by the City Engineer. Other required improvements in the Washington Street right-of-way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: e) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. f) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that either touches the back of curb or approaches within five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. 2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial): Widen the south side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the project boundary to its ultimate width on the south side as specified in the General Plan and/or the requirements of these conditions. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design standard. Additional street width shall be provided to accommodate: a) Two minimum eleven -foot (11') thru lanes. b) A four -foot (4') bike lane. c) A twelve -foot (12') deceleration/right turn only lane at the Avenue 50 project entry or as determined by the City Engineer. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 8 of 21 Other required improvements in the Avenue 50 right-of-way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: d) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. e) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk or as approved by the city Engineer. The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that either touches the back of curb or approaches within five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. f) A 12-foot wide raised landscaped median plus variable width as needed to accommodate the off -site street improvements associated with the development on the north side (La Paloma). Interim and ultimate improvements shall be as approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall be responsible for 50% of the cost to design and construct said raised landscaped median. The landscaped median improvements may be eligible for reimbursement from the City's Development Impact Fee fund in accordance with policies established for that program. Since the Avenue 50 street improvements are contingent upon CVWD dedicating the land to the applicant, the applicant is hereby notified that future site modifications may be necessary including, but not limited to site layout, buildings, and street reconfiguration. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the project boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 9 of 21 construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. The applicant is responsible for construction of all improvements mentioned above. B. INTERNAL STREETS 1) Construct internal streets per the approved preliminary grading exhibit and as approved by the City Engineer. Minimum street width shall be 26 feet except at the entry accessway. On -street parking shall be prohibited except in designated parking stall areas. The applicant shall make provisions for perpetual enforcement of the No Parking restrictions. 2) The location of driveways shall not be located within the curb return when possible. C. KNUCKLE 1) Construct the knuckle to conform to the lay -out shown in the preliminary grading exhibit except for minor revisions as may be required by the City Engineer. 24. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows or the approved equivalents of alternate materials: Parking Lot & Aisles (Low Traffic) 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Parking Lot & Aisles (High Traffic) 4.5" a.c./5.5" c.a.b. Primary Arterial 4.5" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. Major Arterial 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b. Concrete pavement shall be per City Standard 200 or per Geotechnical Report recommendations. 25. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 10 of 21 (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 26. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry (Washington Street): Right turn movements in and out are allowed. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. B. Primary Entry (Avenue 50): Right turn in and out and left turn movements in are allowed. Left turn movements out are prohibited. 27. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 28. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. 29. Standard knuckles and corner cut -backs shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 30. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and in particular the following: A. The parking stall and aisle widths and the double hairpin stripe parking stall design shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150. B. Cross slopes should be a maximum of 2% where ADA accessibility is required including accessibility routes between buildings. C. Building access points shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans to evaluate ADA accessibility issues. D. Accessibility routes to public streets and adjacent development shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 11 of 21 E. Parking stall lengths shall be according to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and be a minimum of 18 feet in length with a 2-foot overhang for all parking stalls or as approved by the City Engineer. One van accessible handicapped parking stall is required per 6 handicapped parking stalls. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, ADA accessibility route to public streets and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths and other improvements as may be determined by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 31. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate mylars of the Final Map. The Final Map shall be of a 1" = 40' scale. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 32. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans). 33. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Design and Development Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. B. C. D. On -Site Rough Grading Plan PM10 Plan WQMP 1" = 40' Horizontal 1" = 40' Horizontal (Plan submitted in Report Form) NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently. On -Site Precise Grading Plan 1" = 30' Horizontal PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 12 of 21 E. Off -Site Street Improvement/Storm Drain Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal, 1" = 4' Vertical F. Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal The Off -Site street improvement plans shall have separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area. G. On -Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal, 1"= 4' Vertical NOTE: D through G to be submitted concurrently. (Separate Storm Drain Plans if applicable) H. Off -Site Median Landscaping Plans 1" = 40' Horizontal Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans and/or as approved by the Design and Development Department. "Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. "On -Site Precise Grading" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, wall elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 13 of 21 34. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the "Plans, Notes and Design Guidance" section of the Public Works Development Division at the City website (www.la-quinta.org). Please navigate to the Design and Development Department home page and look for the Standard Drawings hyperlink. 35. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the mylars of all approved improvement plans acceptable to the City Engineer. 36. Upon completion of construction, and prior to final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all approved mylars previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. The applicant shall employ or retain the Engineer Of Record during the construction phase of the project so that the FOR can make site visits in support of preparing "Record Drawing". However, if subsequent approved revisions have been approved by the City Engineer and reflect said "Record Drawing" conditions, the Engineer Of Record may submit a letter attesting to said fact to the City Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 37. Prior to constructing any off -site improvements on Washington Street and Avenue 50, the applicant deposit securities equivalent to both a Performance and labor & Material Bonds each valued at 100% of the cost of the off -site improvements required on Washington Street and Avenue 50. 38. In the event the applicant fails to construct the improvements for the development, or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, pursuant to the approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of all permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. 39. Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Parcel Map, and the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to: A. Construct certain off -site improvements. B. Construct additional off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement of its costs by others. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 14 of 21 C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are considered to be an obligation of this tentative parcel map. D. Secure the costs for future improvements that are to be made by others. E. To agree to any combination of these actions, as the City may require. Off -Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The applicant shall complete Off -Site Improvements in the first phase of construction. In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of the Final Map, or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the costs of such improvements. 40. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off - site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be approved by the City Engineer. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost estimates. Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements. GRADING 41. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements). 42. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 43. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a civil engineer registered in the State of California, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 15 of 21 B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by an engineer registered in the State of California, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with LQMC Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with LQMC Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls). E. WQMP prepared by an engineer registered in the State of California. All grading shall conform with the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by soils engineer, or engineering geologist registered in the State of California. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. Additionally, the applicant shall replenish said security if expended by the City of La Quinta to comply with the Plan as required by the City Engineer. 44. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 45. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six feet (6') of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 46. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the preliminary grading plan, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. The pad elevations shall be a minimum of one foot PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 16 of 21 above the 100-year storm water surface. 47. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus half of a foot (0.5') from the elevations shown on the approved preliminary grading exhibit, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Engineer for a substantial conformance finding review. 48. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor with applicable compaction tests and over excavation documentation. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 49. If permitted by CVWD and the City Engineer, when an applicant proposes discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, the applicant shall execute an indemnification instrument as approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney. Additionally, the applicant shall pay for all costs of sampling and testing associated with the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The applicant is required to construct required discharge treatment Best Management Practice facilities per the NPDES Permit Supplement A but at a minimum shall install a CDS Unit or equal system as approved by the City Engineer. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative parcel map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions for meeting these obligations. The 100-year storm water hydraulic grade line shall be as determined by CVWD and the City Engineer. Additionally, the applicant shall submit verification to the City of CVWD acceptance of the proposed discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel with the initial submittal of storm drain improvement plans. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 17 of 21 50. Verification of the proposed storm water retention system is subject to review and approval by the Coachella Valley Water District and the City Engineer. If in the event, the proposed retention capacity or pass through storm water flow is found to be inadequate during final design, the Applicant shall revise what is currently proposed in the preliminary hydrology study and make adjustments to the site layout as needed to accommodate the increased retention/detention or pass through capacity required to satisfy safety issues of the Design and Development Department and CVWD. Pursuant to the aforementioned, the applicant may be required to construct additional underground and above ground drainage facilities to convey on site and off site stormwater as well as stormwater from adjacent terrain by the La Quinta Evacuation Channel that historically flows onto and/or through the project site. The applicant shall be required to construct concrete channel lining of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel adjacent to the project boundary as required by the Design and Development Department and CVWD. The concrete lining shall be stained to match the existing channel and/or covered with soil and stabilized with vegetation as approved by CVWD. 51. The applicant shall upsize the existing storm drain improvements or construct a parallel storm drain system to collect the off -site half -street tributary flows on Washington Street and Avenue 50 fronting the project boundary and discharge into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel as approved by CVWD and the City Engineer. 52. If the development is not able to discharge storm or nuisance water from the project into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, the applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), Retention Basin Design Criteria, Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. More specifically, stormwater falling on site and including the off -site half street tributary areas during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The design storm shall be either the 1 hour, 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 53. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. 54. In design of retention facilities, the maximum infiltration rate shall be two inches per hour. The infiltration rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise and as approved by the City PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 18 of 21 Engineer. 55. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 56. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the City Engineer. 57. For on -site above ground common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems. Side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. Additionally, retention basin widths shall be not less than 20 feet at the bottom of the basin. 58. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to LQMC Section 9.100.040(B)(7). 59. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries and levels in any area outside the development. 60. 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. 61. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 62. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions for post construction runoff per the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011. A. For post -construction urban runoff from New Development and Redevelopments Projects, the applicant shall implement requirements of the NPDES permit for the design, construction and perpetual operation and maintenance of BMPs per the approved Water Quality Management Plan PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 19 of 21 (WQMP) for the project as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011. B. The applicant shall implement the WQMP Design Standards per (CRWQCB- CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2013-0011 utilizing BMPs approved by the City Engineer. A project specific WQMP shall be provided which incorporates Site Design and Treatment BMPs utilizing first flush infiltration as a preferred method of NPDES Permit Compliance for Whitewater River receiving water, as applicable. C. The developer shall execute and record a Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Agreement that provides for the perpetual maintenance and operation of stormwater BMPs. 63. The applicant shall install suitable facilities along the westerly boundary of the project to preserve CVWD access and prohibit access to the right-of-way of the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. Additionally, the applicant shall work with CVWD to construct a perpetual maintenance access to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel as required by CVWD and approved by the City Engineer. UTILITIES 64. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 (Utilities). 65. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 66. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 67. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall complywith trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 20 of 21 approval by the City Engineer. Additionally, grease traps and the maintenance thereof shall be located as to not conflict with access aisles/entrances. 68. Utility easements in favor of CVWD shall be clear of any obstructions including overhead obstructions. CONSTRUCTION 69. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly - maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION 70. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans). 71. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 72. All new and modified landscape areas shall have landscaping and permanent irrigation improvements in compliance with the City's Water Efficient Landscape regulations contained in LQMC Section 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscape). 73. The applicant shall submit the final landscape plans for review, processing and approval to the Design and Development Department, in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan application process. When plan checking has been completed by the planning staff, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the Planning Manager. Approval of the final landscape plans is required prior to issuance of the first building permit unless the Planning Manager determines extenuating circumstances exist which justifies an alternative processing schedule. Landscape plans for landscaped medians on public streets shall be approved by both the Planning Manager and the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by both the Planning Manager and/or City Engineer. 74. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance requirements per guidelines in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 21 of 21 Streets, 5th Edition" or latest, in the design and/or installation of all landscaping and appurtenances abutting and within the private and public street right-of-way. PUBLIC SERVICES 75. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer. MAINTENANCE 76. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance). 77. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of perimeter landscaping up to the curb, access drives, sidewalks, and stormwater BMPs. FEES AND DEPOSITS 78. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits). These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and p PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2016- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2015-0002 WASHINGTON 50 (CHANDI GROUP, USA) APRIL 26, 2016 Page 1 of 1 GENERAL The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Village Use Permit, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Conditional Use Permit 2015-0002 shall comply with all applicable exhibits anhd conditions for the following related approval(s): Environmental Assessment 2015-0004 General Plan Amendment 2015-0001 Zone Change 2015-0002 Site Development Permit 2015-0005 Tentative Parcel Map 2015-0007 (Tentative Parcel Map 37007) In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of these approvals, the Director of Design and Development shall adjudicate the conflict by determining the precedence. The applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC), including LQMC Chapter 9.210.020. 4. The car wash facility and associated vacuum stations shall not operate before 7 a.m. or after 7 p.m. on any day of the week. 5. No ancillary uses such as detailing, window tinting, etc. shall be conducted on the property unless specifically approved in writing by the Planning Director. Additionally, no temporary structures such as tents, covers, etc. shall be placed on the property. ATTACHMENT 1 Proiect Information CASE NUMBER: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 APPLICANT: CHANDI GROUP, USA PROPERTY OWNER: UHC 00217 LA QUINTA LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: SOTELO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENGINEER: COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF SITE, ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCPAE PLANS FOR A 52,000 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON APPROXIMATELY 7.6 ACRES, PROPOSING A 6,000 S.F. GAS STATION WITH CONVENIENCE STORE/DELI AND 4,000 S.F. CAR WASH FACILITY, TWO 3,000 S.F. DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANT PADS, AND TWO OFFICE RETAIL/BUILDINGS OF 18,000 S.F. EACH LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND AUTO CENTRE DRIVE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MEDIUM/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (EXISTING) GENERAL COMMERCIAL (PROPOSED) ZONING DESIGNATION: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (EXISTING) COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (PROPOSED) SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES: NORTH: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL VACANT (LA PALOMA PROJECT) SOUTH: FLOODPLAIN CVWD EVAC CHANNEL/GOLF COURSE EAST: FLOODPLAIN CVWD EVAC CHANNEL/GOLF COURSE WEST: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL EXISTING RESIDENTIAL (DUNA LA QUINTA) ATTACHMENT 2 CAL�LE ; 7a_ f r fe ' � v m MEE&" WWI �. i Site VE qg / • �AVENIDA` 17-1, nlL.- a, Project Area Site Map SITE DEVELOPMENT, ZONE CHANGE, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP APPLICATION FOR: GENERAL NOTES A. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE 2013 EDITION OF THE CBC AND ALL OTHER APPLICABLE CODES, STANDARDS, AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE B. IT IS INTENDED THAT A COMPLETE OCCUPIABLE BUILDING PROJECT IS PROVIDED. D. SIGNS UNDER A SEPARATE PERMIT. F• DO NOT SCALE THESE DRAWINGS. VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS IN THE FIELD. ANY DISCREPANCIES IN THESE DRAWINGS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO STARTING WORK. G. ALL PROPOSED SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECT, IN WRITING, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. H. RETAIN THE PROJECT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER TO PROVIDE OBSERVATION AND TESTING SERVICES DURING THE GRADING (INCLUDING UTILITY TRENCHES) AND FOUNDATION PHASE OF CONSTRUCTION AS RECOMMENDED IN THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT. ALL TESTING AND INSPECTION REPORTS, INCLUDING FINAL SUMMATION LETTER, SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND OWNER. G.C. SHALL CERTIFY PAD ELEVATION PRIOR TO START OF FOUNDATION WORK. I. SUBMIT PAY FEES AND OBTAIN ALL PERMITS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT EXCEPT GENERAL BUILDING PERMIT. THIS INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, FIRE SPRINKLER, HOOD ANSUL, OR OTHER RELATED FIRE PERMITS, ENCROACHMENT PERMIT, ETC. MIGUEL'S JR. WILL PAY FOR "CONNECTION FEES" ASSOCIATED WITH UTILITY PERMITS. PAY FOR TEMPORARY FACILITIES FEES AS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE WORK IN A TIMELY MANNER. J. THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR ENTITLEMENT PURPOSES AND NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION VICINITY MAP Bells vn OELLA V1571 h w ffed afinglOr H1144t b P ALAIS 1ITI PO4►d, HAPPY L ACA" rA LA PAZ LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE LAND IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, AS SHOWN BY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY. ALSO EXCEPT THEREFROM A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MEDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTH HALF; THENCE SOUTH 00° 01' 42" FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTH HALF, 30.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF AVENUE 50, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 00° 01' 42" WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 628.93 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTH HALF, THENCE SOUTH 89° 59' 05" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTH HALF, A DISTANCE OF 1,043.45 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG AN ARC OF A CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,680 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16' 22' 39", A DISTANCE OF 766.05 FEET; THENCE NORTH 83° 59' 33" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE 1,138.47 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA BY DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 10, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 40531 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PROJECT D I RECTORY OWNER CHA.NDI GROUP — - USA, — ARCHITECT marks architects inc CHANDI GROUP USA 42-270 SPECTRUM STREET, INDIO, CA 92203 TEL: 760-396-9260 MARKS ARCHITECTS INC 71905 HWY 111 SUITE F RANCHO MIRAGE CA CONTACT: DANIEL MARKS PHONE: 760-610-5264 CONTACT: GABRIELA MARKS PHONE: 619-702-9448 I CIVIL ENGINEER I CDR Commercial Development Resources 2082 MICHELSON DRIVE, SUITE 100 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 CONTACT: AARON M. ALBERTSON, P.E. SCDP PHONE: 949-825-5222 I LANV5CAPE ARCHITECT I sotelo 2643 FOURTH AVE, SAN SAN DIEGO, CA 92103 CONTACT: ANGELINA SOTELO LANDSCAPE 0 ARCHITECTS PHONE: 619-719-6756 B 1 OLOG 1ST BARRETT'S BIOLOGICAL SURVEYS 2035 FORRESTER RD. EL CENTRO CA - 760-352-4159 - _ R . ` C ti TRAFF I C ANP NO 1 SE } ? [red W ` KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES INC. 1111 TOWN & COUNTRY ROAD, SUITE 34 ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92868 CONTACT: CARL BALLARD, LEED GA rtM4tAf.-A PAJ-11M WLj11+rrKfL-l4s Indio TEL: (714) 973-8383 GEOTECHN I CAL SLADDEN ENGINEERING Avenue 46 Wtg11way 111 45090 GOLF CENTER PKWY SUITE F pt) O SQUARE INDIO CA 92201 TEL 760-863-0713 LA �-n/ .50 LA 0 SEC OF WASHINGTON ST. AND AVENUE 50 I LA QUINTA CA LO ART TENNIS V1 LLAS CfiiNA Avenvo SSG, INTA 9 3 La Quinta rLcw" I Avt?»'lJe 52 MTS r�ao M.M.Awn1.44r 50 h4iOUN7AIty Vii W i`CiOFdIPly L'LIJE: CULTURAL RESOURCES Avi TIERRA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 9915 BUSINESS PARK AVE. SUITE C SAN DIEGO CA 92131 TWARA !A2 CONTACT: MICHAEL G. BAKSH, PH.D PAI-Me, TEL: 858-575-9064 Y' ClJJ® 501 h Ave 2a1 5 FAa V-d,2 la quinta, ca PROJECT =�ATA OWNER CHANDI GROUP USA 42-270 SPECTRUM STREET, INDIO, CA 92203 (760) 396-9260 APPLICANT MARKS ARCHITECTS INC 71905 HWY 111 SUITE F RANCHO MIRAGE CA CONTACT: GABRIELA MARKS PHONE: 760-610-5264 ADDRESS: SEC OF WASHINGTON ST. AND AVENUE 50 LA QUINTA CA APN : 770-040-012 LOT AREA: EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ZONING: EXISTING OVERLAY PROPOSED MAX. HEIGHT PROPOSED BUILDING AREAS: 332,436 SF / 7.63 AC MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL GENERAL COMMERCIAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RM) NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN) OR COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) AFFORDABLE HOUSING 40 FEET / 2 STORIES BLDG USE AREA STORIES OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION BLDG. 1 AMPM 6,000 SF 1 STORY M BLDG. 2 CAR WASH 4,800 SF 1 STORY B BLDG. 3 FAST FOOD 2,300 SF 1 STORY A2 BLDG. 4 RESTAURANT 3,700 SF 1 STORY A2 BLDG. 5 RETAIL 9,000 SF 2 STORIES B / M OFFICE 9,000 SF BLDG. 6 RETAIL 9,000 SF 2 STORIES B / M OFFICE 9,000 SF TOTAL: 52,800 SF DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY: AREA SOFT. PERCENTAGE SITE AREA AFTER DEDICATIONS 332,436 310,381 100% BUILDING AREA 52,000 16.75% LANDSCAPE AREA 44,380 14.29% PARKING AREA 214,001 68.94% LOT COVERAGE 34,000 10.95% PARKING REQUIRED: 265 SPACES * SEE SHEET A0.1 FOR PARKING CALCULATIONS PARKING PROVIDED: 274 SPACES + 11 CAR WASH VACUUM SPACES APPLICABLE CODES: 2013 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE 2013 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE 2013 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE 2013 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE 2013 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE 2013 CALIFORNIA GREEN BLDG. CODE TITLE 24 UTILITY PROVIDERS: WATER: COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT (CVWD) SEWER: CVWD GAS: THE GAS COMPANY ELECTRIC: IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT (LID) TELEPHONE: VERIZON CABLE: TIME WARNER CABLE SCHOOL: DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SHEET INDEX TITLE T1.0 TITLE SHEET SITE CIVIL C1.0 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP C2.0 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN C2.1 SITE CROSS SECTIONS 1-1.0 PARTIAL LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN 11.1 PARTIAL LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN 1-1.2 PARTIAL LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN L2.1 LANDSCAPE NOTES ARCHITECTURAL A1.0 BUILDING 1 AND 2 FLOOR PLAN A1.1 BUILDING 1 AND 2 ELEVATIONS A1.2 BUILDING 1 AND 2 ELEVATIONS A1.3 BUILDINGS 1 AND 2 ROOF PLAN A2.0 GAS STATION CANOPY FLOOR PLAN AND ELEVATIONS A3.0 BUILDING 3 FLOOR PLAN AND ROOF PLAN A3.1 BUILDING 3 ELEVATIONS A4.0 BUILDING 4 FLOOR PLAN AND ROOF PLAN A4.1 BUILDING 4 ELEVATIONS A5.0 BUILDINGS 5 AND 6 FLOOR PLANS RENDERED ELEVATIONS AR1.1 BUILDING 1 RENDERING ELEVATIONS AR1.2 BUILDING 2 RENDERING ELEVATIONS AR3.1 BUILDING 3 RENDERING ELEVATIONS 190 01 Iall-Al LI[a marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 c) 0 w} =z Co Q ~ w CO Q° U M U m� C3 nw } Q� � w� .� aM 0 07 H wo w zD oIr o� ❑o I wk!� ❑ 0 zw Q ❑ cn z zw gz ,jo oa a-C/) w� wU J w Q= 0 Lo O2 Y NQ o U �_+ w t O UCE a_ L. w L. N z �Q s` Uj � w J E J Q U U) L a m Q r N W r T Go Q 40 r co V O H ¢ J ¢ W � v z z ¢ J U O Z 00 p H O z 0 "' o U) z w v ¢ LU z <� © a S�ID AR C-26463 -P `nA 9-30-2017 r� REWWAL DATE l7 F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Isheet T1.0 KEYNOTES 9� I 2 y 2 3 a 24 3 5 25 5 I� N — 6 3 c _ v �I" 3 03 � 25 S W 24 GAS —GAS - 25 T(UG) T<UUG T(UG)— Q N00O00'41 "E 12. pi5 LO N44'59'38"E 32.5` �I 25 3 N89'59'48" 1 i QO' t�t I 26 ' I I 14 zI I II LL << I z • J I J < J I J I� Q I XI X I X I w X w l w w I Uj z n V, I I I II I II I I 5 I II I I II I II O I I I II I II I I I II I II n v I I I I II I II I II zi _ + 4 1311 T I II W S N89'59'54"E 254.62' / I 31 VACANT LAND NOTE: IZ EXISTING LAND USE MEDIUM HIGH THERE ARE NO FIRE HYDRANTS WITHIN 500 FEET DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED OF THE PROJECT SITE. GENERAL LAND USE PUBLIC LAND c D /N PROPOSED MEDIAN AND LEFT TURN POCKET STREET WIDENING _ C S S S S EXISTING LANE — — — — — — VACANT LAND EXISTING LAND USE MEDIUM HIGH \ N83'34'55"W 617 DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 1 r 1-4 — _ 8 / 5 , _ 0000 5 \, Poo / 2 STORY BUILDING / ° T r5 2 STORY BUILDING / _OOR: / RETAIL ♦•"'LLL / 30/ /00, SITS PLAN SGALE: I "=40'-O" 0' 20' 40' 60' 100' O TRASH ENCLOSURE O ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE 0 VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE ® DRIVE-THHOUGH TRELLIS 0 CONCRETE PAD FOR TRASH ENCLOSURE. © UNDERGROUND TANKS O7 OUTDOOR TABLE/CHAIRS ® SHADESTRUCTURE ( CLEAN AIR VEHICLE SPACE 10 DRIVE -THROUGH LANE 11 TRUCK TURNING RADIUS, TYPICAL 12 MONUMENT SIGN 13 TOW AWAY SIGN, SEE SIGN PROGRAM 14 NEW SIDEWALK CURB AND GUTTER CD NEW WALKWAY 16 LANDSCAPED DIVIDER 17 LANDSCAPE SEE SHEET L1.0 18 CANOPY 19 CROSSWALK 20 ROAD WIDENING. SEE CIVIL PLANS 21 TRELLIS 22 STOP SIGN 23 ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL. 24 EXISTING TRAFFIC LIGHT. 25 EXISTING STREET LIGHT. RELOCATE. 26 EXISTING POWER POLE TO REMAIN. 27 CAR WASH ENTRY CANOPY. SEE A2.2 28 CAR WASH VACCUM CANOPY. SEE A2.0 29 GAS STATION CANOPY 30 S HIGH SCREENING WALL 31 5' HIGH RETAINING WALL PEVE .OPMENT SUMMARY 4 PARK I NG ANALY515 PARKING PARKING BLDG. # USE AREA RATIO REQUIRED BLDG. 1 AMPM 6,000 SF 1/250 SF+ 10 34 BLDG. 2 CAR WASH 4,800 SF 1/ EMPLOYEE 5 BLDG. 3 FAST FOOD 2,300 SF 1/100 SF+ 2 25 BLDG. 4 RESTAURANT 3,700 SF 1/100 SF+ 2 39 BLDG. 5 RETAIL 9,000 SF 1/200 SF 45 OFFICE 9,000 SF 1/250 SF 36 BLDG. 6 RETAIL 9,000 SF 1/200 SF 45 OFFICE 9,000 SF 1/250 SF 36 PARKING REQUIRED 265 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED 274 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED STANDARD SPACES 239 SPACES COVERED SPACES 24 SPACES ACCESSIBLE SPACES 11 SPACES TOTAL PROVIDED 274 SPACES + 11 CAR WASH DRYING SPACES OWNER CHANDI GROUP — � USA — CHANDI GROUP USA 42-270 SPECTRUM STREET, INDIO, CA 92203 TEL. 760-396-9260 marks a rc h itects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 v) 0 w} =z Co a~ w U) Q° U �a M U m LL kc) C3 ow C <U w U) aM n 0 wL w 2 D� - °0 zW Q ❑ U) z zw a_ M❑ oa a_U) w� w J w J Q = C) NQ O2 N o U�: = w U° Lw w � N z Q Cw J E J Q U (=n LU m Q N N p 40 r M It O H a J a W v z z Q J 0) V O Z p z H O z 0 w o U) z LU v lf z 0 0 <1 I °. A Rcti J C-26463 J � � CJ) ­1 `PA 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www, marksarchitects.com Job Number ISheet KEYNOTES 9� I 2 y 2 3 a 24 3 5 25 5 I� N — 6 3 c _ v �I" 3 03 � 25 S W 24 GAS —GAS — 25 T(UG) T<UG)2 T(UG)— Q 25 N00.0041 "E 12. N44'59'38"E 32.5` �I 25 8 '59'48f 1 i QO' I 26 14 I zI I II • LL< l z I JIJJIJI�< �Iz zII� X I XI X I X M Z VI I I II V, I I II 5 I I II I II II I I I II 0 I I II I I II I I II I I II I I II n I I II v I I II � 4 zi _ + I 1311 , I II I II II II II � I II I II I I II I II I I II - t tltl�l I II Ilw IIQ IIz 0 W w l w 1 1 `Q z zIz I W a la I _j z w �z zIz I w X X I X ( w I II II EXISTING MEDIAN I II I II STREET WIDEN NG I II I II I II 26 I I 15 W S VACANT LAND NOTE: IZ EXISTING LAND USE MEDIUM HIGH THERE ARE NO FIRE HYDRANTS WITHIN 500 FEET DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED OF THE PROJECT SITE. GENERAL LAND USE PUBLIC LAND PROPOSED MEDIAN AND LEFT TURN POCKET STREET WIDENING _ C S S S S EXISTING LANE — — — — — — VACANT LAND EXISTING LAND USE MEDIUM HIGH \ N83'34'55"W 617 DENSITY RESIDENTIAL1-4 1 — _ 8 / 5 8 _ O ca • !��0 � 2 / 5 \, r / 2 STORY BUILDING / BLDG.5 / `L� 2 STORY BUILDING / _OOR: / RETAIL ♦•"'LLL / 30/ /00, SITS PLAN SGALE: I "=40'-O" 0' 20' 40' 60' 100, O TRASH ENCLOSURE O ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE 0 VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE ® DRIVE-THHOUGH TRELLIS 0 CONCRETE PAD FOR TRASH ENCLOSURE. © UNDERGROUND TANKS O7 OUTDOOR TABLE/CHAIRS ® SHADESTRUCTURE ( CLEAN AIR VEHICLE SPACE 10 DRIVE -THROUGH LANE 11 TRUCK TURNING RADIUS, TYPICAL 12 MONUMENT SIGN 13 TOW AWAY SIGN, SEE SIGN PROGRAM 14 NEW SIDEWALK CURB AND GUTTER CD NEW WALKWAY 16 LANDSCAPED DIVIDER 17 LANDSCAPE SEE SHEET L1.0 18 CANOPY 19 CROSSWALK 20 ROAD WIDENING. SEE CIVIL PLANS 21 TRELLIS 22 STOP SIGN 23 ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL. 24 EXISTING TRAFFIC LIGHT. 25 EXISTING STREET LIGHT. RELOCATE. 26 EXISTING POWER POLE TO REMAIN. 27 CAR WASH ENTRY CANOPY. SEE A2.2 28 CAR WASH VACCUM CANOPY. SEE A2.0 29 GAS STATION CANOPY 30 S HIGH SCREENING WALL 31 5' HIGH RETAINING WALL PEVE .OPMENT SUMMARY 4 PARK I NG ANALY515 PARKING PARKING BLDG. # USE AREA RATIO REQUIRED BLDG. 1 AMPM 6,000 SF 1/250 SF+ 10 34 BLDG. 2 CAR WASH 4,800 SF 1/ EMPLOYEE 5 BLDG. 3 FAST FOOD 2,300 SF 1/100 SF+ 2 25 BLDG. 4 RESTAURANT 3,700 SF 1/100 SF+ 2 39 BLDG. 5 RETAIL 9,000 SF 1/200 SF 45 OFFICE 9,000 SF 1/250 SF 36 BLDG. 6 RETAIL 9,000 SF 1/200 SF 45 OFFICE 9,000 SF 1/250 SF 36 PARKING REQUIRED 265 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED 274 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED STANDARD SPACES 239 SPACES COVERED SPACES 24 SPACES ACCESSIBLE SPACES 11 SPACES TOTAL PROVIDED 274 SPACES + 11 CAR WASH DRYING SPACES OWNER CHANDI GROUP - �z USA - CHANDI GROUP USA 42-270 SPECTRUM STREET, INDIO, CA 92203 TEL. 760-396-9260 marks a rc h itects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 v) 0 w} =z Co a~ U Q° U M U m LL kc) C3 ow C <U w U) aM n 0 wL w 2 D� - o� °0 zW Q ❑ U) z zw gz MZ oa a_U) w� w J W J Q = 0 NQ O2 N o U�: = w U° Lw w � N z Q 0w J J Q U (=n L L m Q N N Q 40 r M It O H a J a W v z z Q J 0) V O Z p z H z V w V5 z LU v c z (> °. Sr,� A Rcti J C-26463 J � � CJ) —1 `PA 9-30-2017 r� RWENEWAL DATE l7 F OF CAL\�O ncarb certified www, marksarchitects.com Job Number ISheet 00 0 c A 70 CY) V J r � CV L0 O N z� Q m 75 rr n IZ IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. C, C N00°00'41 "E IN 0 N6 0 t6 12.00' o N86°11150"E (0 - N44°59'38"E - 1 p 6' 32.52' k& N89059'19"E 10.00' 1J23.1' 15°00'36"E 28.60' BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST BASED ON THE SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN AVENUE 50 37007 PAR. MAP NO. 20862 P.M.B. 133/17-18 OWNER/APPLICANT CHANDI GROUP, USA 42270 SPECTRUM ST. STE A I N D I Or CAr 92203 CONTACT: THOMAS FREEMAN TEL: 760.396.9260 ARCHITECT MARKS ARCHITECTURE 71905 HWY. 111 SUITE F, RANCHO MIRAGE CA 92270 CONTACT: GABRIELA MARKS TEL: 760-610-5264 PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY TITLE OFFICER: MATTHEW HOOKS 74770 HIGHWAY 111, SUITE 101 INDIAN WELLS, CA 92210 TEL: 909.510.6207 REPORT DATE: APRIL 6, 2015 ORDER NUMBER: NCS-724313-ONT1 CIVIL ENGINEER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES 2082 MICHELSON DRIVE #100 IRVINE, CA 92612 CONTACT: AARON ALBERTSON, P.E. TEL: 949.825.5222 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES 2082 MICHELSON DRIVE #100 IRVINE, CA 92612 CONTACT: AARON ALBERTSON, P.E. TEL: 949.825.5222 SOILS ENGINEER PETRA GEOSCIENCES 42240 GREEN WAY, STE E PALM DESERT, CA 92211 CONTACT: ALAN PACE TEL: 760.250.9747 / q,2 '1ko ` N89°599"E a ADJACENT LAND USES 7.00' ADJACENT NORTH: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RMH). THIS PARCEL IS OWNED BY CVWD AND AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED TO REZONE TO FLOOD PLAIN (FP). 44 _ 46 / NORTH SIDE OF AVENUE 50:) MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RMH) N89°59'19"E 292.22' - - N83°34'55"W CVWD EAST: FLOOD PLAIN (FP) 617. APN 770-040-001 50/ Q O S48°1 T11 "VV - 46 48 / SOUTH: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RM). THIS PARCEL IS OWNED BY CVWD AND AN APPLICATION < cn0 Q 30.81' N89°59'19"E / HAS BEEN FILED TO REZONE TO FLOOD PLAIN (FP) OR OPEN SPACE (OS). Q 0 56.33 fJ N51 °26'00"E 335.20'mm _ _ WEST SIDE OF WASHINGTON: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RM) AND GOLF COURSE (GC) � W 32.15' S48°17'11"w UTILITY PROVIDERS 1 6 34' 1 1 .0' 1 � 1 30.0' 23.15' PROPOSED DEDICATION10.01 1 1 PROPOSED MEANDERING PARCEL 1 I 00 L1J 1 SIDEWALK EASEMENT N co 117,805 SF / 2.70 AC (G) 00 N 6 1021120 SF /2.34 AC (N) w 1 z NI W w� 0 w 1 /C\I of 0 1 z o 0 0 0 1 z z PAR. MAP NO. 20862 z A P.M.B. 133/17-18 1 p 1 I S41 °0. 304848' � z I r I N00°00'12"E v J j 32.00' I S42 22 54 W A. 1 12.89 l I N89059'48"E 302.02' 1 I 00°00' 12"E 32.00' I , � -48 PARCEL 3 I 40054 52 EUP �0 30.511 41,938 SF / 0.96 AC (G) 38,560 SF / 0.88 AC (N) 0 m co N00°00'11 "E 45.59' 0 NI N89°59'48"E 224.52' N N0000011 "E R� o 16.49' CD z 01 23.15' PROPOSED DEDICATION PROPOSED MEANDERING PARCEL 4 o Cl? SIDEWALK EASEMENT I- I II Cl) A !\ A !\ /\ i1 r 11 /\ !1 A 0-1 / ,0 1 36,340 SF / 0.83 AC (N) '_1 I 1 ° /F \ ��O 2, I N89059'54"E 231.48' CVWD 100, APN 770-040-003 PARCEL 2 132,197 SF / 3.03 AC (G) 130 314 SF/ 2 as or rnn WATER: COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT (CVWD) SEWER: CVWD GAS: THE GAS COMPANY ELECTRIC: IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT (IID) TELEPHONE: VERIZON / CABLE: TIME WARNER CABLE SCHOOL: DESERT SANDS UNIFIED j ZONING/LAND USE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE: MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE: GENERAL COMMERCIAL EXISTING ZONING: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RM) PROPOSED ZONING: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (CN) OR COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) EXISTING OVERLAY: AFFORDABLE HOUSING LEGAL DESCRIPTION I / PROJECT NOTES 1. THOMAS BROTHERS COORDINATES: 2006 RIVERSIDE COUNTY (PAGE / \ 849, GRID G-6). 2. PER FEMA MAP NO. 06065C2241 G, EFFECTIVE DATE: AUGUST 28, 2008. PROPERTY IS DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE THE 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOODPLAIN, /Q<� P� 3. NOT SUBJECT TO LIQUEFACTION OR OTHER GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS, SAID PROPERTY IS NOT IN ANY SPECIAL STUDY ZONES. 4. SETBACKS OF SLOPES TO PROPERTY LINES SHALL CONFORM TO LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIREMENTS. AREAS WHERE GRADING IS REQUIRED OUTSIDE THE PARCEL LIMITS WILL REQUIRE PERMISSION FROM ADJOING PROPERTY OWNER. \0 oo� �A 5. THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE LA PALOMA SPECIFIC PLAN, SP 04-071 6. NO EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE LOCATED ONSITE �JP P 7. 7 FUTURE BUILDINGS ONSITE 1, A. 10 GAS PUMP ISLAND CONVIENT STORE P� B. AUTOMATED CAR WASH C. 2 - QUICK SERVICE RESTAURANTS WITH DRIVE THRU D. 2 - 2 STORY MIXED USE OFFICE, RETAIL, AND RESTAURANT 9. GASOLINE WILL BE STORED IN UNDERGROUND TANKS JQ� ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS 10.THERE ARE NO KNOWN WELLS ON PROPERTY OR WITH 200' OF SUBJECT PROPERTY. 770-040-012 11. NO SUBSURFACE SEPTIC FACILITIES ARE PROPOSED. j O� I AVENUE 50 AVENUE 48 AVENUE 50 �v N w z U zo o Z O w Li- w AVENUE 52 :3-- 40 0 40 80 GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: I"= 40' VICINITY MAP 12. ALL SLOPES ARE AT A MAXIMUM OF 3:1 RATIO 13. ALL OF THE DRAINAGE FACILITIES WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE ARE ROUTED THROUGH DRY WELLS AND ABOVE GROUND AND/OR SITE UNDERGROUND PEROCLATION FACILITIES FOR WATER QUALITY TREATMENT AND RETENTION AND REMOVAL OF 100% OF THE PROJECT 100-YEAR STORM RUN-OFF ONSITE. 14. TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS: 4 BUILDABLE LOTS: 4 NON -BUILDABLE LOTS: 0 TOTAL GROSS ACREAGE: 332,436 SF / 7.63 ACRES TOTAL NET ACREAGE: 307,334 SF / 7.06 ACRES AVERAGE NET SIZE: 76,834 SF / 1.76 ACRES MINIMUM LOT SIZE: 36,340 SF / 0.83 ACRES 15. THIS TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP INCLUDES THE ENTIRE CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP OF LAND DIVIDER. LEGEND (G) GROSS AREA (N) NET AREA EASEMENT - N EXISTING PARCEL LINES - - - - - - PROPOSED INTERIOR PARCEL LINES ■ ■ ■ ■ EXISTING ST. CENTERLINE - - PROPOSED EASEMENT SHEET INDEX C 1.0 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP C 2.0 PRECISE GRADING PLAN C 2.1 CROSS SECTIONS A 0.1 SITE PLAN L 1.0 LANDSCAPE PLAN THE LAND IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, AS SHOWN BY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY. ALSO EXCEPT THEREFROM A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MEDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTH HALF; THENCE SOUTH 00° 01' 42" FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTH HALF, 30.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF AVENUE 50, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 00° 01' 42" WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 628.93 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTH HALF, THENCE SOUTH 89° 59' 05" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTH HALF, A DISTANCE OF 1,043.45 FEET TO A POINT ON A CURVE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG AN ARC OF A CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,680 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16° 22' 39", A DISTANCE OF 766.05 FEET; THENCE NORTH 83° 59' 33" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE 1,138.47 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA BY DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 10, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 40531 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. EASEMENT NOTES INDICATES ITEMS LISTED IN PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT PREPARED BY FIRST AMERCIAN TITLE COMPANY, DATED APRIL 6, 2015. 4. A RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES AND CANALS AS RESERVED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN THE PATENT RECORDED NOVEMBER 18, 1918 IN BOOK 7 OF DEEDS, PAGE 370 OF PATENT. THE LOCATION OF THE EASEMENT CANNOT BE DETERMINED FROM RECORDED INFORMATION. 5. A RIGHT OF WAY AND EASEMENT OF THE COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, IN FAVOR OF THE PUBLIC, FOR ALL PUBLIC ROADS, AND RIGHTS OF WAY HERETOFORE DEDICATED, AQUIRED, RESERVED OR ACCEPTED FOR PUBLIC USE AND ALSO ANY AND ALL PRIVATE EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY FOR ROADS, PIPELINES, DITCHES, AND CONDUITS ON, OVER, UNDER OR ACROSS THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY, EXISTING FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING IRRIGATED AND DOMESTIC WATER TO SUCH OTHER LANDS BY MEANS OF SUCH PIPELINES, DITCHES, AND CONDUITS, AN EASEMENT FOR SLOPE AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED SEPTEMBER 16, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1999-406431 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. IN FAVOR OF: CITY OF LA QUINTA AFFECTS: AS DESCRIBED THEREIN 7. THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT ENTITLED "RESOLUTION NO. 2003-49" RECORDED AUGUST 6, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003-597460 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 8. THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT ENTITLED "RESOLUTION NO. 2004-153" RECORDED JANUARY 26, 2005 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2005-0071986 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. A NOT SHOWN IN TITLE REPORT: AN EASEMENT 5' ON EACH SIDE OF CENTERLINE OF WHICH CENTERLINE OF SAID EASEMENT IS LOCATED 35' EAST OF THE CENTER LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET. SAID EASEMENT IS IN FAVOR OF UNITED STATES OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION FOR IRRIGATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FOR 30" IRRIGATION LINE. marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited rasp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 � 760-610-5264 Cn U w} 00 � <0 U U if Q 2 a mU ❑�-) ww a_ • � wU) MM w� w DD i U 0� ❑0 ❑o zw Q❑ cn z zw gz aLO ❑ it 0a wU) MU J w Q= • a Y a 2 LL 0 z� w o a 0 � a U w .2_ 0 8 Q w J E J �= U = L LIJ Ln \ C:)00 J Q I- V) m O_ `" o U� z U 5; z z w � � L U O PROFESS/O)k 0) ,3 , Q 0 ran w ¢ N0. 65513 Z m EXP. 9/30/17 A \sT9r CIVIL Commercial Development Resources C 1> Today's Ideas. Tomomm's Reality. a1 �1 westenv Place #112 NewpoR Beach CA 92660 T 94�610 9997 www.CDRwestaom www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet C 1.0 �i u 0 z Lu J Lu z Ng 00 z cal 0 �O w J Lu U w 0 PROPOSED STORM DRAIN ALIGNMENT TO UPGRADE PIPE SIZES AND RESOLVE FLOODING AT INTERSECTION. PROPOSED STORM DRAIN TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. h I AVENUE 50 PROPOSED MEDIAN AND LEFT TURN POCKET PROPOSED STORM DRAIN ALIGNMENT TO UPGRADE PIPE SIZES AND RESOLVE FLOODING AT INTERSECTION. PROPOSED STORM DRAIN TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. 0 292.2' 44.91 FG 45.00TC RIGHT TURN DECELERATION LANE 44 50FL -MMONME - - T _ 51 F�11� -� F,5FL 49.72FL kk / - - --- -- ----- - - - 46 -- ■■�■ Em"soft^■■ ■■ ■�■■ ■■■■� �■■� 50 ♦� / _ SWALE TG- - - - - - - ♦♦ 51.00TC o• 46 50 4s.8oTc I %� h 6 48.3OFS1 50.5OFS 43.46TC a ■ ■ ■ -� 42.96FL 7.95TC 48.41 C 4 .0 TC 49.00 C 1. % 5 .67 C� 35lit.0' 7 TC g TG I U ' 7 47.57FL 47 91 g 4 .5 FS 48.50 S 4 5 .17 S 9.2 FS 49.50TC \ 43. 7FG ; 47.45FL 47.58FS 46.95 50.17 I 9. 2T 49.00FS 47.46FL TG 4, 48.80TC 49.25TC 49.67FS 49.57FL 508. 2F 47.25TC .12TC ° SO 48.3OFS 48.75E / 1 II I I � 2S% / � I 49.10TG 48.20 \1 �C 43.37TC , 2 ■ I 46.92FS 48 FS 48 75 49.62FS 50.25T49.75 C 4 l 5TC 46.75TG 4 .75 C / 48.2 S 42.87FL I I 3%� 48.32 48.32 4 .25 S o / �m 48.32FS 43.70 / o o ° o 48.12FL 49.30TC FS-BW I FS FS 49.70TC / \ 48.8OF S 49 49.20FS / > 48.. OTC 49.1OTG 49.10TC 49.1 F `'0 4 18TC �Rc'o"/ 47.70TG C o 1' ° 48.91 49.56 49.33 4 65, S 47. 8TG X 48.8 TC 49.50T 43.08TC 43.4 G ,� 48.6 FG FS 4 FS / 4 13� / 48 3F - 49.0 FS 42. g ■ 47.55TC o 49.43TC 3 .0' 30.0' 3 / ■ 47.05FL-HP 48. 9.1 TC ° FS 8.20TC 91 7 2 5' 4 .65FS/ 49.55TS 7 70TG 43.00TC F F = 49.08 0 8 0 / �` / 49.50TC / 42�\ ■ 48 �� J� 49.00FS 1 /48" 1 /° / .� Q �P y\ 49.33 0 8.8 C� 3.5% 48.75 48.75 ° 0 FF=49.58 FF=49.58 // ���0110 47.42 0 49.56 FS 48 3F - / / ■ FS FS ® PAD-49.00 PAD-49.00 / - o / 43.40 FS-BW ■ ® AM PM CAR </ 010 4�13 G \\ 47. I / / _ % 49.43T � ` WASH S / \\ < 49.FS / F TG 42.40FL� I o+ 48. 18.0' , 49.18TC �,� // 49 FS 0 48.68FS 30.0 18T 47. ■ 4 .17FS 49.11 I ■ FS.32 48.32 �0 48.E 0 49 - u PAD-49.00 43.29TC 42. 9 .. 2,6 - �� 0 � 1°� 48 _ 0 48.60TC c 49 C 48.55FS o° 49.56 47.04TC 48.1 OFS 8.83FS TC FS 46.54TG 48.20TC FS 49.00 u \ 43.61 , 47.70TG 48.501 49.25TC FL -HP II FG 47.50TC FS.50 / 48 48.0 48.75FS ♦ 47.00FS 48.50TC 43.48TC_/ I ♦ 47.80TC RIDGE / UJ 42.98FL 4' 48.00FS p`b 47.30TG 48.70TC R/ID649.33 / 48.2OFS _ FS / w■ 45.85TC 46.75TC 48.50TC 47.1 9 0 / > ■ 45.35TG 46.25FS 48.50TC 48.23TC OTC 47.70TC 455 o � 48.00FS 48.00FS 46.90TG 47.2OFS 47.73FS Q I o _ ____ _ O j9 ■ 45.85N0 O 48.50TC 9.05TC 48.00FS 48.55FS 0 47.84 �`' 1' HIGH 49.48 49.48FS 49.33 / L-T / 45.1 OTC WALL FS FS �? � 49.20TC 44.60FL co 48.70TC 48.7OFS 46 = FAST FOOD �o� 48.50 40 48.20E CIS FsBW _ + FF=49.58 T 8.63TC / �F FF=49.58 0 / Q PAD-49.00 r, 48.13TG PAD-49.00 �. 45.15 ■ � v) � S TG 49.56 R6 e 4 T 49. OT l 47. 5 ® 0 FS 49.56 ■I 4 .6 FS 9 FS 49. 6T 48.70 S ° 1 / T D FS 48. 6F 48.42FS 49.00 / 46.53 I GB b 48.55FS ���° 49.56 49.46 FG FL -HP FS 48.61 TC �� 1� 48.7 C �f FS / 47.57 48.11 FS =� r N 48.98TC 48.2 S c�' / 46.80TC ,. 47.55TC p to 48 46.30FL I FS 47.05TG 48.45 C 49. OT 49.4pTS 47.95 G 49. OF 46.80 ■ I o; 8 48. OF I FS'21 49.33 �\ 0) TG I ° 48.72 °■° �� 48.95TC FS F �a I 48.45E r-S�-BW `, o0 26.1' 48 10 C L � �0 48.30TC ■ 47 60 G 9.5 TC 49.55TC �✓ O2 / 47.80FL '~- qg 49.00F \0 49.05FS nO k " a � �m 49.70TC �✓ 49 FS 49.37FG ( 0�01 N 49.2OFS ,.h I Cv 49.100FC GB 1 ° 47.69 ° 50 8.9T 4 8C 81 T 1 38.79FS) EARTHWORK CALCULATIONS CUT: 700 C.Y. FILL: 99,510 C.Y. NET: 98,810 CY. FILL THESE ARE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERS ESTIMATES AND ARE RAW QUANTITIES. NO ADJUSTMENTS FOR PAVEMENT AND BUILDING SLAB SECTIONS, SUBSIDENCE, SHRINKAGE, OR CLEARING & GRUBBING HAVE BEEN INCLUDED. NEW AC PAVEMENT FOR ROAD WIDENING ADA PATH OF TRAVEL PARKING TABULATION / \ ADA PARKING: 5 VAN STALLS + 6 REGULAR STALLS / - 11 TOTAL ADA STALLS IOF WHICH ONE STALL IS COVERED / REGULAR STALLS: 232 STALLS (NON COVERED) 45 STALLS (COVERED) / TOTAL PARKING: 288 PARKING STALLS 48.98TC F . 4 FS e �° Q 48.48FL 8.4 o / 2 KEY r FS.60 / � g 3 1. RIGID OR FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT 0 50� I o RESTAURANT F9.60 / g0 49.63FL, 2. GRANULAR ROAD BASE I' FF=49.58 49.42 3. 12" MIN. FOR DIAMETERS THROUGH 96" II PAD-49.00 18" MIN. FOR DIAMETERS FROM 102' (� 5' HIGH MAX FS oQ 45.70 4 AND LARGER MEASURED TO TOP OF RIGID ■ RETAINING WALL 46 / F5 , ` � OR BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. ■ / 4. SELECT GRANULAR FILL PER AASHTO M146 2 - -� A1, A2 OR A3, OR APPROVED EQUAL. --`�-- 40 43.00 FL' 0 / PLACED IN B" LIFTS (COMPACTED TO MIN. FL-TG / 90% STANDARD DENSITY PER AASHTO T99.) / / 51.80TC / 5. GRANULAR BEDDING, ROUGHLY SHAPED TO 51.30FL _ - - FIT THE BOTTOM OF PIPE, 4" TO B' IN DEPTH /0r - END F / DECELERATION / TRANSITION I 52.26 / 40 0 I 40 80 GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: >"= 40' SECTION A -A FOR & DIAMETER PIPE SCALE:N.T.S. L SEE VIEWPORT LEFT FOR CONTINUATION 0 Lij BEGIN DECELERATION z TRANSITION Q z I 0 �0 i Q 52.26 / FS-BW 52.68 FS-BW yo /bb` 40 marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 Cn 0 w} Z 0 0o Q0 U U a m0 ❑U ww a_� w= a� U)M wL w U❑ oIr ❑LL zw Q❑ cn z zw a- a- cn - ❑ ir 0a wW M J w Q� • Ir a Y Ir a 2 U- 0 �W w a o0 �a_ U w iz �Q U):5 w Ir J E J OU) U = L Lj <:� Q Z:� C-4 0 T J Q V) m V) Z U Z z Li.l � IL < < , QRoFESS/0,k y �o w ¢ N0. 65513 Z m EXP. 9/30/17 sT9A CIVIL Commercial Development C[)I�Resources Today's Ideas. Tomorrow's Reality. 413I W-�ehV Place ¥'I1> NeVdPA Beach GA 92660 T 94�610 9997 - CDR-t e- www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet C 2.0 FROM EXISTING MEDIAN FACE OF CURB PROVIDE LEFT TURN POCKET 48 46 44 42 EXISTING R 6.42' 38.53' EXISTING -' EX. MEDIAN SIDEWALK (43.55TC) (44.57TC) ISLAND (42.98FS) (44.07FL) (43.68) (44.59TC) 11.00' 11.00' - 11.00' 11.00' 4.00' � 12.00' BW (44.04FS) EXISTING LEFT TURN IEXISTING LANE EXISTING LANE EXISTING LANE PROPOSED PROPOSED RT TURN ------------ ___ BIKE LANE DECELERATION LANE ------------------ --------------------------------------- _ ----------- - --------------------------------------- (43.39TC) - - J 50 48 46 44 PROPOSED 52 50 48 2-STORY BUILDING FF=49.58 PAD=49.00 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 7.12' PLUS 3 LANES PLUS RIGHT TURN DECELERATION LANE AND 15' PARKWAY PER GP EXHIBIT II-3 FOR MAJOR ARTERIAL C-L 51.85' 23.37' 15.00' PROPOSED R 20.00' 10.00, LANDSCAPE SETBACK MEANDERING PROPOSED PARKING 43.19TC PROPOSED PARKWAY 42.69FL 2% MAX 4:� 4A (43.03FL) PROPOSED 6' WIDE FG SFCMON A -A MEANDERING SIDEWALK SCALE:1 "=5' 6.33' _ _ 38.53' _ _ 18.04' FROM EXISTING MEDIAN FACE OF CURB PROVIDE 3 LANES PLUS RIGHT TURN DECELERATION LANE AND 1 S PARKWAY PER GP EXHIBIT II-3 FOR MAJOR ARTERIAL 39.08' EXISTING R 23.37' EX. EXISTING 10.94' 4- 28.15' 1.85' SIDEWALK MEDIAN ISLAND (47.81TC) 47.13FS (46.98TC) (47.79TC) (47.33FS) 11.00, 11.00, 11.00' 0. 4.00' I 12.00' gW (46.50FL) (47.31 FS) EXISTING LANEi I EXISTING LANE EXISTING LANE PROPOSED PROPOSED DECELERATION ----------- ---- BIKE LANE LANE 46.67TC -------- ---------------------- -----------------------4------------------------------------ 46.17FL L - -� - - ! � (47.04TC) (46.51 FL) PROPOSED & WIDE MEANDERING SIDEWALK 15.00' PROPOSED PARKWAY 46.93 2% FG ,:�mFWAIK LOT CURB PROPOSED R20.00' 48 46 44 42 10.00, LANDSCAPE SETBACK MEANDERING SIDEWALK EASEMENT PROPOSED PARKING j LOT CURB 47.23 3:1 FG j 3.1 MAX MAX 47.13 I I FL I I EXISTING EXISTING I 49.46FS R (51.61 FG) VARIES (50.70FG) R PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL I PRIVATE 49.50 TOP OF EXISTING BERM TOP OF BERM BACKYARD 1 RESIDENCE_ 52 PROPOSED I (50.00FG) EVACUATION CHANNEL ------- ------------I F------- FL-HP SURFACE MATCH EXISTING i L� 2.5% - �\ LA QUINTA RESORT & 50 i CLUB, DUNES COURSE I PROPOSED / 48 i SWALE i / I 46 / 50TH STREET ELEVATION (40.00FS) � I 44 NG EXISTING CART EXISTING BERM 00' NORTIH OF THIS LOCATION ��// PART OF GOLF COURSE SHOWN FOR REFERENCE PATH / I 42 - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------- I \� ���/ EXISTING SURFACE EXISTI G) EARTHEN \��\ (35.00FG)38 BOTTOM OF CHANNEL ------------------------ SWALE MORE OR LESS VARIES --------------- - - - - - - - BETWEEN 34.00 AND 36.00 �� 36 ------------------ SECTION C-C 34 SCALE: VERTICAL:1 "=5', HORIZONTAL: 1 "=20' PRIMARYARTERIAL EXISTING 6V ROW PER GP EXHIBIT II-3 PROPOSED G i R R WEST BOUND LANES I EAST BOUND LANES I WIDTH VARIES 20.00' 1 16.8'-24.0' LANDSCAPE SETBACK 52 6.00' 38.03' I 32.84' 1 15.00, 1 PROPOSED PARKING 52 I 50 48FBW (46.95FS) 12.00' 11.00, 11.00, 12.00' 11.00, 11.00, 4.001 EXISTING RIGHT EXISTING LEFT LEFT EXISTING LANE EXISTING LANE PROPOSED 46.44TC) TURN LANE LANE TURN LANE TURN LANE BIKE LANE 46---I (45.94FL) -------------------------------- _ ---.88 \-(46 1 WIDE STRIPE (46.56) FS OR MEDIAN EP 44 42 40 SECTION D-D SCALE:1 "=5' PROPOSED PARKWAY LOT CURB i 50 12.00' 48.30TC i 46.58TC 46.88 PROPOSED 46.08FL FG I 3:1 DECEL. LANE i 48 X ----- I 46 \ PROPOSED 6" 46.68 \ \ WIDE SIDEWALK FL � 44 EXISTING SURFACE \ � - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 42 ----------------------------- 40 LU LU co z EXISTING PROPOSED CVWD EXISTING O WEST BOUND LANES EAST BOUND LANES GL R R PERTY WIDTH OVARIES 20.00' LANDSCAPE SETBACK z 6.00' 18.00' 19.00' 11.00' 11.00, EXISTING 51.00FG PROPOSED 0. 0. SURFACE � EX. DEDICATION SURFACE PROPOSED PROJECT PARCEL 52 52 13.00 13.00 12.00 11.00 ) - - I PROPOSED CURB Q SIDEWALK (51.00FG 48.78FS (48.68TC) EXISTING LANE (48.50) LEFT TURN POCKET PROPOSED LANE PROPOSED LANE _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i 48.50TC _ 3:1 48.00FS 5O 50 BW (48.17FS) FS _ - _ - � _ _ _ \ ----------------------------------------- 4.1 ____MPX MAX ; 48 -- ------ �\ 48 (48.27) 46 EXISTING EDGE I I , ` I OF PAVEMENT PROPOSED PARKING 46 PROPOSED NOTE: ALL PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS AREA ARE - - - - - - - - - - - - - LOT 1' WIDE T WIDE CURB AND GUTTER CONTINGENT UPON CVWD DEDICATING THEIR PROPERTY - - - - - - - - - - - 44 44 AND ASSUMES RE -ENGINEERING AND CERTIFING THE RE -GRADING OF A REGIONAL FLOOD CONTROL LEVEE. SECTION E-E AVENUE 50 i 50 48 46 44 marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited rasp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 � 760-610-5264 cf) U w} J U z 0O a~ U U a0 a mL oU ww <U) w= aI_ U)M wL 2 LU D� �0 o0 oIrIwo o� zw QC) cn z zw gz - aLO MZ Oa [I-U)w� MU J LU QC) • C) a U) Y a 2 LL O �LU w o a 0 a U W i z �Q U� w J E J OU) U = L w I Q o 0 T J Q (� m O GO o_ U) z ~ U Z Z Li.�l ��C)aaaa PROFESS/O& O �4, ALS F y �o c� Q 0 ran w ¢ NO. 65513 Z m EXP. 9/30/17 sT9T CIVIL Commercial Development C [)� Resources Today's Ideas. Tomorrow's Reality. 4131 W_�ehVP1l *111 NeVdPABeach GAXB60 T 94�610 9997 - MR-t-, www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet C 2.1 SCALE:1 "=5' PLAN VIEW SCALE:1 "=110' AkvrMNu0 isc --`— /• i ,� ICI I � Z'/ I 1 11 I ACCENT CACTI, I ! TYPICAL i7' I — t I 33—,�,=33 3—=—=_—=—=-3-3 i i � -- -=—t 4"-8" ARIZONA — COBBLE STREAM ° o ° � �+CiG1 !� I�r C�i'. "� „."���T, �rG''1��' # � � � � � � � to �E ,'� `•:� �%moo 0_jam. ,� t� tk �t :11��'i�'��%�lb�.n_ . �lryw o1:� •o'mo o :I-, 1 I-1,1 : .t•o 1C1'�1-1trym1.1:" I �'.I. ©�? >13..'w e F G� PROCUMBEN FLOWERING SHRUBS, TYgCAL I fr 1 d z �o t4 III I � I 11 M-91 I If IF IF AREAS COVERED GALIFORN ' BXPOSED TO BE WITH IA 60La r-------------- I I I I 'I`yAGGENT I I I I I I I I SUCCULENTS, I I TYPICAL I I I I I IIII ' I I I i l o® I I I I I I I I I I I I �-1 I'I v I I I I � I I I ^g O I I I I ---------- --BouLaERs, TYPICAL LOWERING SHRUBS, TYPICAL Fa — /ice/ SEMI -EVERGREEN SHADE TREE, TYPICAL I I L I \ !• mp IIIIIIIIIt MATGHLINE SEE SHEET L1.2� so J?j F BLDG. 1 BLDG. 2 FLOWERING TREE, TYPICAL ACCENT r r r GRASSES, TYPICAL n n n* n n n y _Iz_�x -ye= EI II -II II II II - II r r IyIIIIyI I II] II 011 0 I LII W li II II i II al_ _IL LLL L LL L L L - C e r� o n� /LrL M ins M • L \I 1 L L L L L L 1 I I DECIDUOUS SHADE TREE, I 1 TYPICAL ,< 1 � I\ / 1 I h e \ \ \ � 1 1 � 1 ' 1 I � r \ 1 i i 1 J \ 1 W \ W 7RF.F. SHADING LE6EN=) : PARKING AREA SHADED BY TREES OR CANOPY SHADING SUMMAR`I' TOTAL PARKING AREA: 50,-731.01 S.F. (EXCLUDES DRIVE AISLES) 50% SHADING REQUIRED: 25,565.50 S.F. PARKING AREA SHADED BY TREES: 30,1341.56 S.F. =561.40% OF PARKING AREA TREE SIZE SHOWN AT 15 YEARS MATURITY, PER RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE 348, SECTION 15.12 TOTAL AREA OF LANDSCAPE= 31,400 SF (I1.5'7%%%) TOTAL SQ OF TURF= O SF -ALL SHRUBS AREAS TO BE IRRIGATED WITH THREAVEV EMITTERS. -TREES WILL BE IN SEPARATE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS USING BUBBLERS. -SMART CONTROLLERS WILL BE SPECIFIED FOR THIS PROJECT. -NO SPRAY IRRIGATION WILL BE USED FOR THIS PROJECT. FINAL LANDSCAPE PLAN WILL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF LA OUINTA WATER EFFICIENT ORIDINANCE AND THE COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT'S LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM ORDINANCE. VE"REEN SHADE \\ ;,,TREE, TYPICAL ' r' w - 1 KEY MAF - l # Z PARTIAL. PLANTING PLAN 5CALE 1'=10'-O" NSCALE 0 5'10 2C: 1 "-20" F marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. son diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U QU a 0 m LL iB ww a2 � �o wLL � �w 8� zLL ` zju 5 z a16 - EEO as w� ZU ZIW CI U OY N< 0 IU � Lo `m E:� 0 � L Q N a m r 2 � a Z � a Y a 9 a a a a sotelo �m Sw beg�,G9L10.. IANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS wiwlaowiew lwm' www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet L01 *0 t'! @ICI ���' ����!''' • r{a o NEW :s, WAWA ,t #f ;N. z'#'p� I �•�© ml �:i\�CC1y�y 'M7rMlM1`Ml' s.I •' 2••,� �k�. 'ai�•�C���'�/1i/ I _ _ ♦�YMIANAC %u:��• �f au • 9,a F QO III / 0� k�;c g, �:.;■F �''��.. � • pq .� - Je • h\ u le.Fsr ■1 t��•� � � _ p� 10 . �L�N�')+�ai i`w� �a+3_��,��, _ _ ix.�..�.�-.,. "����`M►, I' � '_ _ _` � j,.y1�,'yr�y3 �~�.#a .. �(� r� �/111 \\, ON MM • \ \t it •. ioe#'PY+ka•., y� A � .. �y.,♦. +y �± #,'`�• _�• • e�l#Pa `£•� .•\ .' }j{� .. -_-. -. '. 'w' mass -1� ����iilsff� 3l 1 •�� 603 51 -kL3 _ i S • 4 .i -� + a .. v �� • � lid .i tf� ., • •• .- 5 e 2043 Pam Penick `. � - ;� - ti •� • 11 I ■ ACCENT TYPICAL 11111 war• ■ i — .. — Tl� FLOWERING SHRUBS, TYPICAL ACCENT PALM TREE, TYPICAL 0 TREE, TYPICAL r'l_= m i�1ltj o p U ` o Dal •i, . r to O o ��� •:�i .�. 5 D M BLDG. 4 low --- _�'W NOT A PART SHRUBS, / TYPIGAI / / / / PARTIAL PLANTING PLAN 50ALE 1'=20'-O' n KEY MAID i� D ° ♦ ,' BOULDERS, / / TYPICAL All landscaping shall consist of, at minimum, 36 box trees (i.e., a minimum 2.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade level after planting), 5-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. Double lodge poles (two-inch diameter) shall be used to / brace and stake trees. ALL EXPOSED A minimum 48" box equivalent for all trees in the Washington and Avenue 50 GH AREAS TO BED�% / // perimeter parkways, and along the CVWD channel, shall be provided. All Date 0 GALIFIfFO 7RN W Ti / Palm trees shall be installed at a minimum 18 foot brown trunk height (BTH). , / � / GOLD D. > N 0 5' 10' 20' SCALAw�" Y PLANT LIST ABER 51ZE SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME TREES ACA. 5TE. 56' BOX ACACIA 5TEN01-HYLLA 5HOE-5TRIN6 ACACIA BRA. FOR 56'BOX BRACh'CHITON POPULNEU5 KURRAJONG CHI. LIN. 56' BOX CHILOP515 LINEAR15 DESERT WILLOW PAR D.M. 56' BOX PARKIN50NIA 'VE5ERT MUSEUM' DESERT MUSEUM PALO VERVE PHO. VAC. 56' BOX PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA DATE PALM PRO. CHI. 56' BOX PRO5OPI5 CHIL.EN515 C41LEAN MESQUITE 5HR)U85 AGA. AME. 5 GAL. AGAVE AMERICANA CENTURY PLANT AGA. B.G. 5 SAL. AGAVE BLUE 6LOW BLUE &LOW AGAVE AGA. DES. 5 GAL. AGAVE VE5METTIANA SMOOTH AGAVE AGA. PAR. 5 GAL AGAVE PARRYI V. TRUNCATA ARTICHOKE AGAVE BOU. EPP. 5 GAL BOUGAINVILLEA SPECIES BOUGAINVILLEA CAE. PUL. 5 GAL. CAE5ALPINIA PULCHERRIMA PEACOCK FLOWER DA5. WHE. 5 GAL. DA5YLIRION WHEELERI DESERT SPOON ECH. 6RU. 5 GAL. ECHINOCACTUS 6RU50NII GOLDEN BARREL GAGTU5 FOIU. 5PL. 5 GAL. POUQUIERIA 5PLENDEN5 OCOTILLO HE5. PAR. 5 GAL. HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA RED YUCCA LAN. N.G. 5 SAL. LANTANA NEW (SOLD GOLDEN SPREADING LANTANA LEU. FRU. 5 GAL. LEUGOPHYLLUM FRUTE5CEN5 'GREEN CLOUD' TEXAS RANGER MUH. GAP. 5 GAL. MUHLENBER&IA CAPILLARI5 HAIRAWN MUHLY PAC. MAR. 5 GAL. PACHYCEREU5 MAR6INATU5 MEXICAN FENCE P05T ROS. O.P. 5 GAL. R05MARINU5 OFFICINALIS FROSTRATUS PROSTRATE R05EMARY RUG. EOU. 5 GAL. RU55ELIA EOU15ETIFORM15 CORAL FOUNTAIN SEN. NEM. 5 GAL. SENNA NEMOPHILA DESERT CA551A TEG. 5TA. I SAL TEGOMA 5TAN5 YELLOW BELL5 VINE5 BOU. SPP. 5 &AL BOUGAINVILLEA SPECIE5 BOUGAINVILLEA GAL. HAE. 1 15 GAL. GALLIANDRA HAEMATOGEPHALA RED POWDER PUFF W_ I marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited carp 2643 fourth ave. son diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 w 00 QU a 0 �N w° a �N U0 00 0° Qo z� s= �z ga �U J L OY Na Z0 U 0 w Lo `m z Y E:� U� LU o a 'm J Z a � z � o a Z 05 a a a a a so_ Z �m Son bego G9210.. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS x°ww�aowieio.wm" www.marksarchitects.com ISheet ,.2 PLI04NT11 G NOTES I. LAN05GAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL RECEIVE THE SITE AS 15. 2. THE PLANTING PLANS ARE DIAGRAMMATIC. MINOR ADJUSTMENTS IN PLANT LOCATIONS AND TYPE MAY BE MADE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 3. CONTRACTOR TO BE ADVISED THAT CERTAIN GULTIVAR5 OR SPECIES OF PLANTS FOR THI5 PROJECT MAY ONLY BE AVAILABLE THROUGH RETAIL SOURCES (IE.: PATENED MONROVIA SELECTIONS). CONTRACTOR 15 FURTHER ADVISED THAT ALL PLANT MATERIAL FOR THI5 PROJECT SHALL BE "PREMIUM" NURSERY STOCK. 4. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND REPLACED UPON REQUEST BEFORE OR AFTER THE PLANTING. 5. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR WILL COORDINATE HIS WORK WITH THE OTHER TRADES AND MAINTAIN DRAINAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION 6. PLANT QUANTITIES AND AREAS 5HOWN ON LEGENDS ARE FOR CONTRACTORS' CONVENIENCE IN ESTIMATING ONLY. CONTRACTOR 15 RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING PLANT MATERIALS TO COVER ALL AREAS AS SHOWN ON PLANS. 7. SLOPE ALL PLANTING AREAS AWAY FROM BUILDING AT 2% MINIMUM FOR 5 FEET MINIMUM, WHERE APPLICABLE. 8. TREE AND SHRUB PITS 5 6ALLON5 AND SMALLER SHALL BE TWO TIMES ROOTBALL DIAMETER WIDE AND 1-1/2 TIMES CONTAINER DEPTH. q. TREE AND SHRUB PITS 15 GALLONS AND LARGER SHALL BE TWO TIMES ROOTBALL DIAMETER WIDE AND I" LESS THAN CONTAINER DEPTH. 10. TREE STAKING SHALL BE DONE ONLY IF E55ENTIAL AND REQUIRED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. TREES THAT CANNOT STAND WITHOUT THE NURSERY STAKE SHALL BE REJECTED. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TREES STABILITY DURING THE LENGTH OF THE GUARANTEE PERIOD. ALL STAKING AND GUYING MATERIALS SHALL BE REMOVED AT THE END OF THE I -YEAR TREE GUARANTEE PERIOD. II. DO NOT DAMAGE PLANT ROOTBALL DURING TRANSPORTATION OR PLANTING. 12. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT SCHEDULE FOR BIDDING PURPOSES ONLY. A 501L TEST SHALL BE MADE BY CONTRACTOR, AND RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS SHALL BE USED FOR ACTUAL INSTALLATION. 100 LBS. OF GYPSUM PER 1000 50. FT. 70 LB5. OF TRI-G (6-2-4 W/ 5% SULFUR) PER 1000 50. FT.m 6 L65. OF IRON SULFATE PER 1000 SQ. FT. 25 LBS. OF 501L SULFUR PER 1000 SQ. FT. 5 CUBIC YARDS OF NITROLIZED ORGANIC, AMENDMENT PER 1000 50. FT A. FOR DESERT TREES AND SHRUBS, PLANTING PITS SHALL BE 2X ROOTBALL AND BAGKFILLED WITH NATIVE SOILS. 13. AMENDED 501L SHALL BE ROTOTILLED TO A DEPTH OF 8" 14. NO IRON SULFATE SHALL COME IN CONTACT WITH ANY MA50NRY SURFACE. 15. NITROLIZED ORGANIC AMENDMENT SHALL BE HUMIG COMPOST FROM A&RI-SERVICE, LOAMEXT^, OR APPROVED EQUAL. 16. A. PLANTING BAGKFILL MIX FOR ALL CONTAINER PLANTS OR AS NOTED IN PLAN, SHALL CONSIST OF 1/5 NITROLIZED OR6ANIG AMENDMENT AND 2/3 EXISTING SOIL, PLUS 15 LB5. GYPSUM, AND 8 L55. OF TRI-C (6-2-4 W/ 5% SULFUR) PER CUBIC YARD. FOR DESERT TREES AND SHRUBS BAGKFILL TO BE NATIVE SITE 501L ONLY. B. ALL PLANTED AREAS SHALL BE WATERED IN THOROUGHLY WITH 5ARVONT"', PER MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS IN ADVANCE OF PLANTING. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE WATERED THOROUGHLY WITH 5UPERTHRIVE1m WITHIN I HOUR OF PLANTING. 17. ALL PLANTS 1-GALLON SIZE OR LARGER SHALL RECEIVE A&RIFORM 21-GRAM 20-10-5 FERTILIZER TABLETS AT THE FOLLOWING RATES: ONE PER 1-GALLON; TWO PER 5-6ALLON; FIVE PER 15-6ALLON; 12 PER 24" BOXED TREES; 18 PER 36" BOXED TREES (SEE L.A. FOR RATES FOR LARGER STOCK). PLACE TABLETS AT HALF THE DEPTH OF THE PLANTING PIT AND I" FROM ROOTBALL (BOXED TREES SHALL BE IN 2 LAYERS GOING UP ALONG SIDES OF THE ROOTBALL). 15. ALL PLANTS INSTALLED FROM FLATS SHALL RECEIVE ONE A&RIFORM 5-GRAM 20-10-5 TABLET EACH, MIXED WITH A HANDFUL OF PREPARED BAGKFILL PER NOTE 17. la. BOUGAINVILLEAS SHALL BE PLANTED WITH INTACT ROOTBALL5. NO BROKEN ROOTBALL5 WILL BE ACCEPTED. 20. ALL PLANTS EXCEPT BOU&AINVILLEAS PLANTED FROM CONTAINERS SHALL HAVE THEIR ROOTBALL5 SCORED WITH A SHARP TOOL TO A DEPTH OF I" IN THREE LONGITUDINAL INCISIONS AT LOCATIONS SPACED AROUND THE ROOTBALL BEFORE PLAGIN6 PLANT IN PLANTING HOLE. 21. ALL TYIN& MATERIALS AND MARKING TAPES SHALL BE REMOVED AT THE TIME OF PLANTING. 22. STAKES SHALL BE REMOVED FROM VINES AND VINES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH AN APPROVED MEANS OF SUPPORT. 25. ALL SHRUB PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE COVERED WITH CALIFORNIA GOLD D.G. OR ARIZONA GOBBLE. SUBMIT SAMPLE TO CLIENT FOR APPROVAL. 24. IF THE SOIL TEST PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED SHOWS THAT PERMEABILITY RATES ARE LE55 THAN .5" PER HOUR, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MAY REQUIRE A TREE DRAIN SYSTEM. 25. A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PERIOD OF qO DAYS SHALL BE CONSIDERED PART OF THIS CONTRACT. REFER TO THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS FOR DETAILS. PLAIIT Nil PART I - &ENERA L 1.01 SCOPE OF WORK • A. WORK DISCUSSED IN THI5 SECTION INCLUDES THE FURNISHING OF ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, AND EQUIPMENT REQUIRED TO COMPLETE WORK INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. THE WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BEST 5TANDARD5 OF PRACTICE RELATING TO THE VARIOUS TRADES AND UNDER THE CONTINUOUS SUPERVISION OF A COMPETENT FOREMAN, CAPABLE OF INTERPRETING THE DRAWINGS, NOTES, AND THESE SPECIFICATIONS. 1.02 SUBMITTALS • A. CERTIFICATIONS OF CONFORMANCE OR COMPLIANCE: IN ADDITION TO ANY OTHER CERTIFICATES SPECIFIED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH A CERTIFICATE WITH EACH DELIVERY OF BULK MATERIAL STATING THE SOURCE, QUANTITY, TYPE OF MATERIAL, AND THAT THE MATERIAL CONFORMS TO THE SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENT. THESE CERTIFICATES SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER PRIOR TO THE START OF THE MAINTENANCE PERIOD. AFTER THE 501L HAS BEEN PREPARED AS GALLED FOR IN THE SECTION ON SOIL PREPARATION, THE IRRI6ATION SYSTEM HAS BEEN INSTALLED AND TESTED, AND CONDITIONS ARE FAVORABLE TO PLANT, THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL REQUEST APPROVAL TO START PLANTING FROM THE OWNER. • B. AGRICULTURAL SUITABILITY 501L TESTS SHALL BE MADE BY THE CONTRACTOR (AT THE DIRECTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT) AFTER ROUGH GRADING 15 COMPLETED AND CONTRACTOR SHALL ADJUST 501L AMENDMENTS ACCORDINGLY. PART 2 - DELIVERY AND STORAGE 2.01 PMLIVMY • A. PROVIDE NOTIFICATION OF THE DELIVERY SCHEDULE IN ADVANCE 50 MATERIAL MAY BE INSPECTED UPON ARRIVAL AT THE JOB SITE. REMOVE UNACCEPTABLE MATERIAL FROM THE JOB SITE IMMEDIATELY. • B. PROTECT PLANTS DURING DELIVERY TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO THE ROOT BALLS OR DE510CATION OF LEAVES. PROTECT TREES DURING TRANSPORT BY TYING IN THE BRANCHES AND COVERING ALL EXP05ED BRANCHES. • G. DELIVER PESTICIDES OR OTHER CHEMICALS TO THE 51TE IN THE ORIGINAL, UNOPENED CONTAINERS. CONTAINERS THAT DO NOT HAVE A LEGIBLE LABEL THAT IDENTIFIES THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANUFACTURER'S REGISTERED U5E5 WILL BE REJECTED. 2.02 STORAGE • A. KEEP 6YP5UM AND FERTILIZER IN DRY STORAGE AND AWAY FROM CONTAMINANTS. • B. STORE AND PROTECT PLANTS NOT INSTALLED ON THE DAY OF ARRIVAL AT THE 51TE AS FOLLOWS: I. OUTSIDE STORAGE SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM THE WIND. 2. KEEP PLANTS, INCLUDING TH05E IN CONTAINERS, IN A MOIST CONDITION BY WATERING WITH A FINE MIST SPRAY. 3. SEPARATE PLANTS TO PREVENT DAMPING OFF. • C. DO NOT STORE CHEMICALS AND HERBICIDES WITH ANY OTHER LANDSCAPE MATERIALS. STORE IN AN APPROVED, LOOKED, SEPARATE STRUCTURE OR VEHICLE. 2.03 HANDLING • A. PLANTS: TAKE CARE TO AVOID DAMAGING PLANTS BEING MOVED FROM THE NURSERY OR STORAGE AREA TO THE PLANTING SITE. HANDLE ALL PLANTS CAREFULLY TO AVOID CRACKIN6 OR BREAKING THE ROOT BALL. DO NOT HANDLE PLANTS BY THE TRUNK OR STEM. REMOVE DAMAGED PLANTS OR PLANTS WITH BROKEN OR CRACKED ROOT BALLS FROM THE SITE. • B. SPECIMEN PLANTS SHALL BE PLANTED, MULCHED, GUYED, AND IN A BASIN AND FERTILIZED WITHIN 48 HOURS AFTER REMOVAL FROM PREVIOUS LOCATION. 2.04 JOB CONDITIONS PLANTING GONDITION5: PLANTING SHALL NOT BE DONE WHEN THE GROUND 15 MUDDY OR IN AN UNSATISFACTORY CONDITION FOR PLANTING. 2.05 GUARANTEE WORK SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE TERMS OF THE GENERAL PROVISIONS, EXCEPT THAT PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE GUARANTEED THROUGH THE PLANT MAINTENANCE PERIOD. ALL PLANTINC75 SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR AS LONG AS THE CONTRACTOR 15 MAINTAINING THE LANDSCAPING, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT BOXED TREES SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR ONE YEAR. ANY MATERIAL THAT IS NOT GROWING PROPERLY DURING THIS PERIOD SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE RECEIPT OF A WRITTEN NOTICE BY THE OWNER. ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR THE ORIGINAL PERIOD, 5TARTIN6 FROM THE DATE OF REPLACEMENT. THE CONTRACTOR'S GUARANTEE MAY BE EXTENDED BY THE OWNER IN GASES WHERE PLANTS ARE 5LOW TO ESTABLISH. IF THE CONTRACTOR FAILS TO MAKE REPLACEMENTS WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT, THE OWNER MAY REPLACE THEM AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE AFTER DULY NOTIFYING HIM. PART 3 - MW17UCTS 3.01 TOPSOIL WHERE NEW TOP501L 15 GALLED FOR, PROVIDE A NEW GLASS A TOP501L AND/OR MODIFY EXISTING TOP501L TO SUPPLY THE FOLLOWING COMPOSITIONS. REQUIREMENTS: PH BETWEEN 6 AND 7.4, GONTAININ& FROM 5 TO 20 PERCENT OR&ANIG MATTER A5 DETERMINED BY THE ORGANIC CARBON 6A, CHEMICAL ANALYSIS METHOD DESCRIBED IN USDA 501L SURVEY INVE5T16ATION REPORT NO. I. MAXIMUM PARTICLE SIZE, 3/4-INCH, WITH MAXIMUM 3 PERCENT RETAINED ON 1/4-INCH SCREEN. SOLUBLE SALTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 600 PPM. OTHER COMPONENTS SHALL BE WITHIN THE FOLLOWING PERCENTAGES: - SILT 25-50 - CLAY 10-30 - SAND 20-55 5.02 GYPSUM AND PH ADJUSTERS • A. GYPSUM: COMMERCIALLY PACKA6ED, FREE FLOWING 6YP5UM CONTAINING NOT LE55 THAN 15 PERCENT, BY VOLUME, OF CALCIUM SULPHATE A5 ACTIVE INGREDIENT • B. FLOWABLE GYPSUM SHALL BE A CALCIUM SULFATE, DIHYDRATE, EQUIVALENT TO 5.1 LB/U.S. GALLON. • G. SULFUR: SHALL BE ELEMENTAL; q0% PURE. 5.05 SOIL CONDITIONERS USE INDIVIDUALLY OR IN COMBINATION AS REQUIRED TO MEET SPECIFIED REQUIREMENTS FOR TOPSOIL. • A. ORGANIC SOIL AMENDMENT: SHALL BE DERIVED FROM WOOD (RESIDUAL PRODUCTS) FROM THE BARK OF PINE WHITE FIR AND RED FIR, CEDAR 5HAVIN65 OR REDWOOD 5HAVIN65. AMENDMENT UPON ANALY515 SHALL CONTAIN AT LEAST 0.5% NITR06EN BASED ON DRY WEIGHT WITH AN ASH CONTENT NOT TO EXCEED 10%. A COMMERCIAL GRADE PRODUCT SHALL BE USED, WITH A SAMPLE ACCOMPANIED BY AN APPROVED LABORATORY ANALYSIS WITH THE FOLLOWING: GUARANTEE - NT/ CU. YD.= 560-820LBS.; PH LESS THAN (6.5; SALINITY EGE LESS THAN 2.5 MILLIMOHS / CC; IRON EXPRESSED AS METALLIC = 0.1 % USE INDIVIDUALLY OR IN COMBINATION AS REQUIRED TO MEET SPECIFIED REQUIREMENTS FOR TOPSOIL. PARTICLE 51ZE: MINIMUM PERCENT BY WEIGHT PASSING: - NO. I MESH SCREEN .2% - NO. 5 MESH SCREEN 36% - NO. 8 MESH SCREEN 25% - NO. 12 MESH SCREEN 50% - NO. 32 MESH SCREEN 5% 3.04 FERTILIZER • A. FERTILIZER: ONLY IF NOT 5UPERGEDED BY A SITE SPECIFIC AGRICULTURAL SOILS REPORT, USE A COMPLETE COMMERCIAL, GRANULAR FERTILIZER GONTAININ6 THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM PERCENTAGES, BY WEIGHT, OF PLANT FOOD NUTRIENTS: - IS% AVAILABLE NITROGEN - IS% AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS - 6% AVAILABLE POTA551UM - 1.8% SULFUR - 1.5% IRON • B. FERTILIZER PLANTING TABLETS: TIGHTLY COMPRESSED FERTILIZER CHIPS FORMING A TABLET THAT 15 INSOLUBLE IN WATER, 15 DESIGNATED TO PROVIDE A CONTINUOUS RELEASE OF NUTRIENTS FOR AT LEAST 24 MONTHS AND CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM PERGENTA&E5, BY WEIGHT, OF PLANT FOOD NUTRIENTS: - 20% AVAILABLE NITROGEN - 10% AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS - 5% AVAILABLE POTASSIUM PLANTING TABLETS SHALL WEIGHT APPROXIMATELY 21 6RAM5 EACH FOR TREES AND SHRUBS AND 5 6RAM5 FOR GROUND COVER PLANTS. • G. IRON GHELATES: GONTAININ& 10 PERCENT IRON AS METALLIC. 5.05 PLANTS • A. CARE OF STOCK PILED PLANTS. WHERE EXI5TIN& PLANTS ARE TO BE DUG, STOCKPILED AND LATER TRANSPLANTED DURING CONSTRUCTION TRANSPLANTS FROM AREA OF BUILDING ADDITION, THEY SHOULD BE HEELED IN WELL WITH A MIXTURE OF SOIL AND APPROVED SOIL AMENDMENT AND WATERED TWICE A WEEK WITH WATER AND ONCE A WEEK WITH WATER AND SUPERTHRIVET'" THEY MUST BE PLACED IN AN AREA PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE BY CONSTRUCTION. • B. PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE FURNISHED IN THE QUANTITIES AND / OR SPAGIN& AS 5HOWN, OR NOTED FOR EACH LOCATION, AND SHALL BE OF THE SPECIES, KINDS, SIZES, ETC., AS SYMBOLIZED AND/OR DESCRIBED IN THE DRAWINGS. PLANT NAMES INDICATED OR LISTED ON THE DRAWIN65 CONFORM TO "STANDARD PLANT NAMES" ESTABLISHED BY THE AMERICAN JOINT COMMITTEE ON HORTICULTURAL NOMENCLATURE, EXCEPT FOR NAMES NOT COVERED HEREIN, THE ESTABLISHED CUSTOM OF THE NURSERY IS FOLLOWED. • G. PLANTING STOCK: PLANTING STOCK SHALL BE WELL -BRANCHED AND WELL -FORMED, SOUND, VIGOROUS, HEALTHY, AND FREE FROM DISEASE, 5UN50ALE, WINDBURN, ABRASION, AND HARMFUL INSECTS OR INSECT EGGS, AND SHALL HAVE HEALTHY, NORMAL, AND UNBROKEN ROOT SYSTEMS AND NOT ROOT BOUND. DECIDUOUS TREES AND 5HRUB5 SHALL BE SYMMETRICALLY DEVELOPED, OF UNIFORM HABIT OF GROWTH, WITH 5TRA16HT BOLES OR STEMS AND FREE FROM OBJECTIONABLE DISFIGUREMENTS. EVERGREEN TREES AND SHRUBS SHALL HAVE WELL DEVELOPED SYMMETRICAL TOPS WITH TYPICAL SPREAD OF BRANCHES FOR EACH PARTICULAR SPECIES OR VARIETY. &ROUND COVERS AND VINES SHALL BE VI60ROU5, HAVE THE NUMBER AND LENGTH OF RUNNERS, AND CLUMP SIZE SPECIFIED, AND BE THE PROPER AGE FOR THE GRADE OF PLANTS SPECIFIED. ONLY VINES AND GROUND COVER PLANTS WELL ESTABLISHED IN REMOVABLE CONTAINERS, INTEGRAL CONTAINERS, OR FORMED HOMOGENEOUS 501L SECTIONS SHALL BE USED. PLANTS SHALL NOT BE PRUNED PRIOR TO DELIVERY, EXCEPT A5 AUTHORIZED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE. IN NO CASE SHALL TREES BE TOPPED BEFORE DELIVERY. • D. SIZES OF PLANTS: SHALL BE AS STATED IN THE PLANT LIST. CONTAINER STOCK (I GALLON, 5 GALLON, 15 GALLON AND 24" BOXED SIZE) SHALL HAVE BEEN GROWN IN CONTAINERS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME SUFFICIENT TO DEVELOP ROOT GROWTH SUFFICIENT TO HOLD THE SOIL BALL TOGETHER TO THE 5IDE AND BOTTOM OF THE SUFFICIENT TO HOLD THE SOIL BALL TOGETHER TO THE SIDE AND BOTTOM OF THE CONTAINER IN WHIGH IT WAS DELIVERED. THE HEIGHT AND SPREAD OF ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE MEASURED WITH BRANCHES IN THEIR NORMAL POSITION; AND SHALL BE AS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. THE CALIPER OF ALL TREES SHALL BE MEASURED 2'-0" ABOVE THE SURFACE OF THE GROUND. WHERE CALIPER OR OTHER DIMEN51ON5 OF ANY PLANT MATERIALS ARE OMITTED FROM THE DRAWINGS IT SHALL BE AVERAGE STOCK FOR TYPE LISTED. • E. PLANT MATERIAL: PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE NURSERY GROWN, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. GROUND COVER PLANTS SHALL BE WELL ROOTED GUTTIN65 GROWN IN FLATS AND SHALL REMAIN IN THOSE FLATS UNTIL PLANTED. I. PLANT LIST: AS INDICATED ON DRAWINGS. 2. SAMPLES, TESTS, AND INSPECTIONS: SOURCE OF MATERIAL SHALL BE FURNISHED IF REQUESTED BY THE OWNER OR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. • F. SUBSTITUTIONS: 5UB5TITUTION5 FOR THE INDICATED PLANT MATERIALS WILL BE PERMITTED, PROVIDED THE SUBSTITUTE MATERIALS ARE APPROVED IN ADVANCE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, AND THE SUBSTITUTIONS ARE MADE AT NO ADDITIONAL CHARGE TO THE OWNER. EXCEPT FOR THE VARIATIONS SO AUTHORIZED, ALL SUBSTITUTE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THESE SPECIFICATIONS. IF ACCEPTED SUBSTITUTE MATERIALS ARE OF LE55 VALUE THAN TH05E INDICATED OR SPECIFIED, THE CONTRACT PRICE WILL BE ADJUSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVI51ON5 OF THE CONTRACT. • 6. APPROVAL: ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE INSPECTION AND APPROVAL OF OWNER OR HI5 REPRESENTATIVE, BEFORE PLANTING. ALL PLANTS SUPPLIED TO THE PROJECT (WHETHER PLANTED OR NOT) ARE SUBJECT TO REJECTION BY THE OWNER OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE. PLANTS NOT APPROVED SHALL BE REMOVED FROM SITE IMMEDIATELY AND REPLACED WITH SUITABLE PLANTS. 3.06 MULCH ALL SHRUBS PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE COVERED WITH CALIFORNIA GOLD D.G. OR ARIZONA GOBBLE. SUBMIT SAMPLE TO CLIENT FOR APPROVAL. 3.01 PLANTING SOIL MIXTURE MIXTURE SHALL BE THOROUGHLY MIXED TO THE PROPORTIONS GIVEN ON THE PLANS. 5.081 STAKING MATERIAL • A. STAKES: SHALL BE 10' LOD&EPOLE STAKES POINTED ON ONE END. • B. TREE TIES: SHALL BE ARBORTAPETM OR APPROVED EQUAL. • C. TREES ARE TO BE FREED FROM THEIR STAKES AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE TIME. 3.Oq PESTICIDE5 AND CHEMICAL CONTROLS • A. PRE -EMERGENCE APPLICATIONS: EPTAM, TREFLAN, 5URFLAN OR RON5TAR. • B. P05T-EMERGENCE APPLICATION: ROUNDUP. • C. INSECT CONTROL SHALL BE SAFER INSECTIGIAL SOAP, NICOTINE SULFATE, SPECTRACIDE, MALATHION-50, DIAZINON OR AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY A PEST CONTROL ADVISOR. • D. ALTERNATIVE PRODUCTS MAY BE USED IF APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE OWNER. PART 4 - EXECUTION 4.01 SOIL PREPARATION SEOIENCE • A. NO SOIL PREPARATION SHALL BE PERFORMED UNTIL ALL STRUCTURES AND WALL5 AND CONSTRUCTION ITEMS (INCLUDING IRRIGATION MAINS) HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. • B. THE OWNER OR HI5 REPRESENTATIVE SHALL APPROVE THE SITE GRADING PRIOR TO SOIL PREPARATION. • G. THE 51TE SHALL BE FREE FROM ALL WEEDS, TRASH AND DELETERIOUS MATERIALS PRIOR TO 501L PREPARATION. • D. AFTER THE 51TE HAS BEEN GLEANED AND ALL &RADE5 ESTABLISHED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SPREAD THE SOIL AMENDMENTS IN AN EVEN LAYER OVER PRESCRIBED PLANTING AREAS. ROTOTILL IN THE AMENDMENTS TO THE REQUIRED DEPTH; METHOD AND EQUIPMENT BEING SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE OWNER OR HI5 REPRESENTATIVE. • E. IF, AFTER AN AREA HAS BEEN ROTOTILLED, THE CONTRACTOR DISPLACES OR BURIES THE AMENDED SOIL THROUGH GRADING OR TRENCHING, THE AREA 15 SUBJECT TO FURTHER AMENDING AS DETERMINED BY THE OWNER OR HI5 REPRESENTATIVE. • F. AMENDMENTS ARE TO BE INCORPORATED INTO THE 501L A5 5HOWN ON THE PLANS. • 6. ALL SOIL CONDITIONERS SHALL BE ADDED TO THE SOIL AS INDICATED SPECIFICALLY ON THE PLANS. • H. AFTER ALL TRENCHES IN PLANTING AREAS HAVE BEEN SOAKED AND COMPACTED, AND ALL AREAS WITH 5LOPE5 OF LE55 THAN 4:1 HAVE BEEN ROUGH GRADED, THESE AREAS SHALL BE GRO55-RIPPED AND TILLED AND AMENDED, PER PLANS, TO A DEPTH OF 8". REMOVE STONES AND DEBRIS LARGER THAN 2-1/2 INCHES IN DIAMETER. • I. WEED CONTROL: PRIOR TO ANY HYDR05EEDIN6, IRRIGATE ALL PLANTING AREAS FOR APPROXIMATELY TWO (2) WEEKS TO ENGOURA6E WEED SEED GERMINATION. ALLOW WEEDS TO &ROW UNTIL THEY REACH A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF TWO TO THREE (2 TO 3) INCHES AND THEN THOROUGHLY SPRAY WITH "ROUND UP"'. REMOVE ALL WEEDS PRIOR TO SEEDING. DO NOT ALLOW THE USA&E OF ANY PRE -EMERGENCE HERBICIDES OR "DOWPONT "FOR WEED CONTROL. 4.02 FINAL GRADING • A. AFTER COMPLETION OF ALL SOIL CONDITIONING, TILLING AND SOIL TREATING, CORRECT IRREGULARITIES IN FINISHED SURFACES TO ELIMINATE DEPRESSIONS. REMOVE ALL DEBRIS AND STONES LARGER THAN ONE INCH REMAINING ON THE SURFACE. PROTECT FINISHED AREAS FROM DAMAGE DUE TO VEHICULAR OR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC. • B. DEEP WATERING AND LEACHING: AFTER 501L CONDITIONING AND FINAL GRADING IS COMPLETE, SETTLE AND LEACH PLANTING AREAS BY WATERING TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 8 INCHES. • C. EXCAVATION FOR PLANTING: PRIOR TO EXCAVATING FOR PLANT PITS, THE AREA SHALL CONFORM TO THE LINES AND GRADES SHOWN. VERIFY LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. REPAIR ANY DAMAGE DONE TO UTILITY LINES SHOWN. IF UTILITY LINES NOT SHOWN ON THE DRAWIN65 ARE ENCOUNTERED, NOTIFY THE OWNER IMMEDIATELY. IN THE EVENT THAT UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION WORK OR 065TRUCTION5 ARE ENCOUNTERED IN THE PLANTING OPERATION, ALTERNATE LOCATIONS WILL BE SELECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. LOCATION OPERATION WILL BE DONE AT NO EXTRA COST TO THE OWNER. I. PLANT PITS: DIG PITS BY ANY METHOD PROVIDED THAT THE PITS HAVE VERTICAL SIDES AND FLAT BOTTOMS. WHEN PITS ARE DUG WITH AN AUGER AND/OR THE SIDES OF THE PITS BECOME &LAZED, SCARIFY THE &LAZED SURFACE AT A MINIMUM OF 4 LOCATIONS. IF THE PERCOLATION IS SUCH THAT WATER WILL NOT DRAIN OUT OF THE HOLE OVERNIGHT, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE CAUTION NOT TO OVER WATER PLANTS. NO TREES 15 GALLONS AND OVER SHALL BE PLANTED IN A HOLE THAT WILL NOT NATURALLY DRAIN OVERNIGHT AFTER HAVING BEEN FILLED WITH WATER. • D. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE SET 50 THAT, WHEN SETTLED, THEY BEAR THE SAME RELATION TO THE REQUIRED GRADE AS THEY BORE TO THE NATURAL GRADE BEFORE BEING TRANSPLANTED. EACH PLANT SHALL BE PLANTED IN THE CENTER OF THE PIT AND BAGKFILLED, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, WITH THE PREPARED SOIL. NO SOIL WILL BE PERMITTED AROUND TRUNKS OR STEMS. ALL BROKEN OR FRAYED ROOT SHALL BE PROPERLY GUT OFF. USE EXCESS TOPSOIL TO FORM WATERING BASINS AROUND PLANTS. AMEND AS DESCRIBED IN NOTES AND DETAILS. PART S - COMPLETION OF CONTRACT 5.01 RESTORATION AND CLEAN-UP REMOVE EXCE55 WA5TE MATERIAL DAILY. WHEN PLANTING IN AN AREA 15 COMPLETE, CLEAR THE AREA OF DEBRIS, SPOIL PILES, AND CONTAINERS. WHERE EXISTING PLANTING BEDS HAVE BEEN SCARRED OR DAMAGED, RESTORE THESE DAMAGED AREAS TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITION. REMOVE DISUSED EQUIPMENT AND IMPLEMENTS OF SERVICE AND LEAVE ENTIRE AREA INVOLVED IN A NEAT ACCEPTABLE CONDITION SUCH AS TO MEET THE APPROVAL OF THE OWNER. 5.02 INSPECTIONS AND ON SITE REVIEW THE OWNER, HIS REPRESENTATIVE OR THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT MAY MAKE PERIODIC ON SITE REVIEWS DURING THE PLANTING. ANY PLANTS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN HANDLED, SPOTTED OR PLANTED PROPERLY SHALL BE SUBJECT TO REMOVAL, AND THEY SHALL, IF NECESSARY, BE REPLACED OR RELOCATED AS DIRECTED AS PART OF THE CONTRACT. A PLANT MAY BE REJECTED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR ANY REASON AT ANY TIME. FOR DESERT TREES AND SHRUBS, PLANTING PITS SHALL BE 2X ROOTBALL AND BAGKFILLED WITH r `u NATIVE SOILS. TOP OF STAKE TO BE 3" MAX. ABOVE TOP TREE TIE 4 6" BELOW CANOPY. TIE W/ CINCH TIE, ARBORTAPE OR APPROVED EQUAL, TWO TIES MIN. KEEP LOOSE. LOD&EPOLE TREE STAKE. DRIVE 2 FT. MIN. INTO UNDISTURBED SOIL. DO NOT PENETRATE ROOTBALL. KEEP TOP OF STAKE BELOW TOP OF CANOPY. 4" HIGH WATERING BASIN @ EDGE OF PLANTING PIT. SCORE ROOT BALL W/ SHARP TOOL IN 3 PLACES TO I" DEPTH ALONG SIDES AND BOTTOM BEFORE PLAGIN6 IN THE PLANTING PIT. APPLY 5UPERTHRIVET , 5ARVONT , WITHIN 2 HOURS OF PLANTING PER NOTES. PLANTING PIT 2 TIMES WIDTH $ 1" LE55 THAN CONTAINER DEPTH. BAGKFILL TO BE 1/5 NITROLIZED AMENDMENT, 2/5 EXISTIN6 SOIL, PLUS OTHER GORREGTIVES SHOWN ON PLANTING NOTES. TIQUE NOT TO SCALE TOP OF ROOTBALL - I" ABOVE SURROUNDING GRADE. 2" + BERM FOR WATERING BASIN FIN15H GRADE. 1.5 X CONTAINER DEPTH, FOR I GAL. PLANTS I" LESS THAN CONTAINER DEPTH, FOR 5 d 15 GAL. PLANTS I ir SHRUB PLANTING NOT TO SCALE -III-III III=III= =11 III 1-2 TIMES WIDTH =III OF CONTAINER AT BOTTOM OF PIT 2X CONTAINER WIDTH AT BOTTOM OF PIT TREE 1-1/2" BARK MULCH AROUND TREE TOP OF ROOT BALL TO BE I" ABOVE 5URROUNDIN& GRADE. SLOPE ® IV FT. - 24" DEEP WATERING TUBE 4"(P PERFORATED PIPE WITH 3"(P GRATE, LOCATION, UPHILL SIDE. i�ADJACENT 51DEWALK III= 21 6M. PLANT TABS PER SPECS. PLACE IN DIRECT CONTACT W/ ROOT BALL. SHRUB, PER PLANS. � � 21 &M. PLANT TABS, PER SPECS. PLACE IN DIRECT CONTACT W/ ROOTBALL. I PER 1-6AL 2 PER 5-67AL 5" MAX. BAGKFILL MIX: 1/3 NITROLIZED SHAVINGS, 2/3 NATIVE SOILS, PLUS CORRECTIVES PER PLANTING NOTES. APPLY 5UPERTHRIVETM WITHIN 2 HOURS OF PLANTING PER NOTES. NATIVE OR UNDISTURBED SOILS. &ROUNDCOVER PAGIN&(5) BETWEEN CENTERS OF PLANTS EQUAL I ALL DIRECTIONS. EE LEGEND FOR CLEARANCE BETWEEN PLANTS ND ADJACENT FLATWORK OR PAVING. COTE 'LANT GROUND COVERS TO 41THIN 12" OF SHRUB 'LANTIN& PITS, AND/OR '0 THE EDGE OF DRIFTS )F PLANTS. TR IANlGULAR SPACING GROUNDCOVERS 4 SHRU156 'NOTE: ROOT BARRIERS WILL NOT BE WRAPPED AROUND THE ROOTBALL ROOT 15AIRR 102 NOT TO SCALE PLANTED AREA; SLOPE ® 2% MIN. III III= 0 3" GRAVEL BAGKFILL, - = 0 III: 00 5/4 SIZE, EXTENDING �0 2-3" BELOW THE BOTTOM OF ROOT BARRIER.I oCa ho O� NOT TO SCALE 24" HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE ROOTBARRIER WITH INTERLOCKING STRIPS AT JUNCTIONS, PER SPECS. WITH TOP 1/2" ABOVE GRADE. ROOT DEFLECTORS MUST FACE TOWARDS TREE. ADJACENT CURB AND/OR PAVING, A5 OCCURS 1 I1 I 1 = COMPACTED OR NATURAL BASE. ROOT BARRIERS ARE SHOWN ON THE PLANTING PLAN. GONE I RM LOCATION W/ LAND. ARCH. 0 0 IW7 marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. IFM san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U w } = z 00 w~ a i� cn w Q0 U m j- rUkc) oU Ir a-w C a� w U) d U)M 07 O z w w U, 00 ow 0 0 z w ao Cn z z W gz fl co � o r 0Q wU) w P w J w a= • U LoQ ■- v1 OY NQ NJ_ U0 w +• w UM w CL L w C �Q L :5 �w w EJ J Q �C/) LU to Q N ad m m J z M I ­ m cc C/) m 0. o Z Q z z z w � < a o m a a a a �PNDS CAP,c SOT% �O _ W s� n. J 1 g ature 1 12. 1,17 CPf. Rene al Date 9, 03 Date l b �1 o SO 2643 fourth avenue te I San Diego, CA 9210P LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS pww asot o.com www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet • 12 MIN. STREET PAVING FINISH GRADE,-4-INCH GRATE I" FEBGO YA REDUCED COPPER UNION, ° ° . NOTES: FINISH GRADE (W/ PLASTIC VALVE BOX # (INCLUDED) r PRESSURE BAGKFLOW TYP. . •° ° ° • MULCH) 1/2" BELOW LID H/ U.V. INHIBITORS PREVENTER. Al ° ° °° ° I. BAGKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE ° VALVE BOX TOP IN PER SPECS. I BUBBLER: MOD. #PCB (INCLUDED) 1� ° ° COMPACTED TO A RELATIVE SHRUB PLANTING AREA e o� o� ���°�� ALT. ITEM IF BALL VALVE A5 REQ'D BY COMPACTION OF 10% OR MORE. NATIVE 501L FREE OF 0- REQUIRED: HILKINS AGENCY HILKIN5 550 G MODEL -10LARGE (3" DIA. OR 2. ALL PVC PIPE SHALL LAY FREE F - CHECK VALVE (INCLUDED) PRE55URE SERIES, TYPICAL, LINE SIZE LU GREATER) ROCKS AND IN THE TRENCH WITH NO INDUCED PEA GRAVEL (OPTIONAL) REGULATOR. THREADED COPPER R15ER i LU X > - DEBRIS STRAIN AND WITH SUFFICIENT TRENCH MARKER TAPE ALLOWANCE FOR EXPAN51ON AND = = -III= -III SOLENOID SET ® 75 PSI z - WRAPPED IN POLYETHYLENE l > � IRRIGATION LATERAL CONTRACTION A5 RECOMMENDED BY THE - _- _-_ ACTUATED GLOBE WIRE VALVE- III I/2-INCH PVC SGH 80 NIPPLE (INCLUDED) + CONCRETE PAD, 2" ABOVE FINISH GRADE GRADE, SIZE PER ENCLOSURE Q w LINE(S) =III = t LU PLASTER OR MORTAR MANUFACTURER. CONNECTORS PVC MALE ADAPTER III I/2-INCH q0-DEGREE ELBOW (INCLUDED) DIMENSIONS $ NOTES w � 2 SAND AS PER SECTION 200 OF THE STANDARD 3. TEFLON TAPE R" HIDE SHALL BE - 12 DIAM. PVC 5CH. 40 NIPPLE � __ =III=III=III=III= III= =III=III=III=III= - - - - - - - - - - - Q GLR SPECIFICATIONS, WITH A USED ON ALL THREADED LOOP r 2-INCH SWING ASSEMBLY III -III -I I '11111 .. 11= I I=1 III -III -III -III- tu ol MIN. SAND EQUIVALENCY CONNECTIONS. PVG PVC SXS ELL= INCLUDED) Q OF 50 SLEEVES WHERE SHOWN ON PLANS (SIZE A5 SHOWN) 4. THE LETTER INSHALL BE LATERAL FLOW LATERAL PIPE .01 SXT COPPER ELL (q0 ) 5GH. 80 PV ° FEMALE ADAPTER MIN. 2 X PIPE DIA. STAMPED OR CHISELED ON THE IMPROVEMENT (CURB -SIDEWALK) PVC MALE PVC. SGH. ° FLOW DIRECTION IRRIGATION MAINLINE DIRECTLY ABOVE THE PRESSURE PIPELINE. ADAPTER = 40 NIPPLE O o 00 �ONo �ocPo 00p0 O `0q O� III 1/2-INCH MALE NPT p FROM METER DIRECT BURIAL CONTROL WIRE, IN SLEEVE FOLLOWS 5. ALL PLASTIC PIPE UNDER UNION PVC TEE ® III INLET (INCLUDED) 40 IS"X12"X12" CONCRETE PVC, IRRIGATION '� 11 OR ELL PVG 5GH TEE III THRUST BLOCK JOINT TRENCH EXCEPT @ PAVEMENT SHALL BE INSTALLED IN FULL BOXES A PVC, SLEEVE. BRICK (OPTIONAL) IN MIDDLE PVC, MAIN_= OR ELL MAINLINE PEA GRAVEL. 4 MIN. F - - v �+ _ ® 6. MINIMUM CLEARANCE BETWEEN DEPTH �� u INSET A f� NQTES: PRE55URE PIPES SHALL BE 2 . 4-INGH BASKET WEAVE I. ALL PIPING FROM THE METER THROUGH WRAPPED A5 REQ D BY AGENCY. 2„ CANISTER (INCLUDED) THE BAGKFLOW PREVENTER SHALL BE 7. INLET FITTINGS TYPICAL TO OUTLET GLR. TREE (SEE PLANTING PLANS ROOT WATERING SYSTEM, $ PLANT LEGEND) : i TYPICAL, PER INSET 'A' TYPE M OR L COPPER WITH SOLDERED FITTINGS. JOINTS. 8. BAGKFLOH PREVENTER A55EMBLY 2. ALL FITTINC75 AND NIPPLES SHALL BE SHALL BE TESTED UPON INSTALLATION BY COPPER. A CERTIFIED BACKFLOH DEVICE TESTS 3. NIPPLES NOT USED. JO I NT TRENCH REMOTE CONTROL VALVE NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE FINISH CLOSE SHALL BE CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE THE ENGINEER AT LEFT ROOTBALL GRADE 4. TEFLON TAPE R" WIDE SHALL BE USED WITH WRITTEN TEST RESULTS COMPLETED ON ALL THREADED CONNECTIONS. BY A CERTIFIED BACKFLOH DEVICE IRRIGATION NOTES FINISH GRADE MAX. 1/2" PLASTIC VALVE BOX = 5. CONCRETE PAD SHALL BE 26" WIDE $ 5" TESTER PRIOR TO THE BAGKFLOH BELOW VALVE BOX TOP W/ LID _ THICK (520-G-2500). PREVENTER ASSEMBLY 5 ACCEPTANCE 15 I. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL IRRIGATION SYSTEMS THAT ARE COMPLETE AND IN NON LAWN AREA - 6. ALL PIPE BELOW GRADE SHALL BE THE ENGINEER. REP. PRESS. $ACKPLOA PREVENTER FUNCTIONING IN EVERY WAY. - -I 1 _ =III -III=III= - -I 2. PLANS ARE PRECISE, AND YET DIA&RAMMATI G. PRECISE LOCATION OF HEADS SHALL WIRE III= I - SOLENOID ACTUATED _ NOT TO SCALE BE FIELD ADJUSTED TO MEET MINOR VARIATIONS IN PLAN. CONNECTORS=III -_ GLOBE VALVE 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK AND VERIFY ALL SITE CONDITIONS, UTILITIES, AND 12 DIAM. = RED BRA55 NIPPLE PVC LATERAL - 7 DIA. VALVE BOX SERVICES PRIOR TO TRENCHING. z LOOP. III LINE (SEE PLAN 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL CHECK AND VERIFY WATER PRESSURE OF 75 PSI AT POINT OF RED BRASS 45° ELL FOR SIZE) III III III= III -------------- CONNECTION (P.O.G.) FOR SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED AT GAS STATION PRIOR TO N RED BRA55 NIPPLE RED BRASS NIPPLES RED BRA55 -III - -III-I I (-I I III=III= -III-III I II SUPPLEMENTAL TREE ROOT BEGINNING OF WORK. NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCY. PVG FEMALE 5. POINT OF CONNECTION (P.O.G.) SHALL BE AT EXISTING GVWD IRRIGATION WATER 45° ELL ADAPTER FLOW III -III -I III- (WIRE TO INTERFACE III=III - NOT TO SCALE J�IAT�RI NG SYSTEM METER FOR SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED AT &AS STATION. GVWD TO PROVIDE A NEW RED BRA55 NIPPLE � PVG - I PANEL IS" &A. MIN. WIRE SIZE, REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW PREVENTER FOR THIS PROJECT -IF NON - EXISTENT. 6. DIRECT BURIAL CONTROL WIRE SHALL BE 24 VOLT SIN&LE CONDUCTOR SOLID � i MAIN �� = O o NOTE: CONTRACTOR To SUPPLY AND INSTALL MF6R. BATTERY WITH BUILDING WALL. MAX EIRE RUN 1000 FT. o 0 �o°�O 000 °0 0 00 °, FACE OF FLOW SENSOR COPPER, PLASTIC INSULATED GABLE RATED FOR DIRECT BURIAL APPLICATIONS, UF, UL APPROVED, 14-6AU6E (MINIMUM) CONTROL WIRE, 12-GAUGE (MINIMUM) FOR COMMON o0°00000 0 00 . ° EXTERIOR TH15 INSTALLATION. WALL PVC, MAINLINE AUTO CONTROLLER PER PLANS AND &ROUND RETURN WIRE. SIZE OF WIRE FOR RUNS OVER 1000' LONG SHALL BE PER RED BRASS 45° ELL SPECS, IN A LOCKABLE MANUFAGTURER S SPECS. PVC, FEMALE PEA GRAVEL ADAPTER BRICK VANDALPROOF, STAINLESS STEEL NEUTRAL WIRES: WHITE (#12 AW6), DO NOT INTERCONNECT NEUTRAL WIRES BETWEEN 4" MIN. DEPTH RED BRA55 UNION ENCLOSURE, PER LEGEND OR APPROVED EQUAL, WALL MOUNT ° ° boo goy - ° BRICK CONTROLLERS. PER MFGR'5 PER 5PE05. MAKE ALL ° PILOT WIRES: (#14 AN&), USE AS MANY AS NECESSARY AND OF DIFFERENT COLORS MASTER VALVE CONNECTIONS IN51DE CABINET. CONNECTIONS 5 X PIPE 10 X PIPE (P UPSTREAM SPARE WIRE5: TWO (2) RED (# 14 AW&) FROM FURTHEST VALVE OR MANIFOLD TO EACH „ 6R6VEL NOT TO SCALE CONTROLLER. MIN. I/2" RIGID CONDUIT, PAINTED TO MATCH 5URROUNDIN65. 5UMP. (0 7. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE TWO EXTRA CONTROL WIRES AT FURTHEST VALVE BACK TO THE CONTROLLER AND (ALT ITEM) ONE EXTRA WIRE FROM EACH VALVE BANK BACK FINISH GRADE (W/ MULGH) JUMBO PLASTIC, VALVE BOX W/ 1/2" BELOW VALVE BOX TOP U.V. INHIBITORS PER SPECS. MIN. 3/4 " RIGID CONDUIT, PAINTED IwI �LOA SENSOR NOT TO SCALE TO CONTROLLER. IN SHRUB PLANTING AREA DRIP CONTROL TO MATCH SURROUNDINGS, FOR 8. IN -LINE WIRE SPLICES SHALL BE MADE ONLY IN PULL BOXES, OR PLASTIC VALVE ZONE KIT 120V POWER SUPPLY. PROVIDE BOXES, WITH WATERPROOF SEALIN& PACKETS. w1RE CONNECTORS GROUND WIRE FOR CONTROLLER. COORDINATE POWER SUPPLY 7" DIA. VALVE BOX q. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SLEEVES AND CHASES UNDER PAVING, (W/12" LOOP) CONNECTION H/ OWNER. THROUGH WALLS, ETC., UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SLEEVIN& SHALL BE MARKED AT m EACH END OF FLATWORK OR WALLS BY A PAINT DOT. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 10. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTE LOCATIONS OF TREES ON PLANTING PLAN AND SHALL - I i� \� - ANCHOR CONDUIT TO WALL H/ -IIIIIII -III -I I � I -III= ROUTE IRRIGATION PIPE AND PLACE HEADS TO PREVENT CONFLICTS WITH TREE 6ALV. PIPE CLAMPS AND _III ( PLANTING. GROUP VALVES IN BOXES, PARALLEL TO EACH OTHER, I N PLANTI N& AREAS. PVG SXS - APPROVED ANCHORS. LOCATE PIPE ALONG EDGE OF PLANTING AREAS WHEREVER POSSIBLE. ELL (10) _ i POLY LATERAL FINISH GRADE. BALL VALVE 11. ALL PIPE AND WIRE UNDER VEHICULAR USE AREAS AND PAVING SHALL BE 56 DEEP I I LINE (TO AND INSTALLED IN PVG SCHEDULE 40 SLEEVES. SLEEVES SHALL BE AT LEAST TWIGE 15 I I EMITTERS) _ _ _ I „ THE DIAMETER OF THE PIPE OR WIRE BUNDLE TO BE ENCLOSED, WITH A MINIMUM OF 2 MIN. I I - -i -_ - _ _ _ _ _ III- III--� -III-III -= _ _ _ :° III -III= -III- 3 � PVC �4 DIA. GRAVEL MAINLINE SUMP. 6" X 6" 21Z FLUSH ALL PIPES CLEAN PRIOR TO INSTALLIN& XERI-EMMITERS 13. OBTAIN AN IRRIGATION COVERAGE APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT R ° O0 00 00 Oo g0 0°0 00 ° o O`-�'o0 0 �J000 ��O ° 00 d �o o 80 C O -III- -� CONTROL WIRES SWEEP ELLS, TYP. III- III � o 0 0 s °ODo o TO VALVES. Q°� 0 00� oho° PRIOR TO PLANTING. CONTACT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AT LEAST 24 HOURS INs-cQ�°o ADVANCE OF DESIRED INSPECTION TIME. o o Ooo O o 120V TO POWER 5UPPLY. oO° °°o° �°o og o 0 14. CONTROL WIRES SHALL BE BUNDLED WITH ELECTRICAL TAPE AT 5'-0" INTERVALS AND AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER 5ALL VALVE BURIED BENEATH MAINLINE WHERE POSSIBLE OR AT THE SAME DEPTH AS MAINLINE PEA GRAVEL. 4 MIN. DEPTH NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE ALONG ED6ES OF PLANTING AREAS. BRICK (OPTIONAL) IN MIDDLE 15. ALL "DRIP" IRR16ATION DEVICES, SHALL HAVE VALVES THAT SERVICE "DRIP" GRIP REMOTE CONTROL VALVr -3/4" HOSE BIBB (CHAMPION # 5401) IRR16ATION AND SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH AN APPROVED FILTER, PER PLAN. ] SUPPLY I KEY/HOSE BIBB rm NOT TO SCALE _ 16. ALL TRENCHES SHALL BE WETTED AND REGOMPACTED TO,IO% MINIMUM UNDER VALVE BOX LID W/ U.V. INHIBITORS VACUUM BREAKER (HBV III) ASSEMBLY W/ TH15 JOB. FLATWORK AND 55% IN PLANTI N6 AREAS. 17. SYSTEM CONTROLLER SHALL BE SUPPLIED WITH THE CORRECT BATTERY BACK UP (PURPLE COLORED). 1 �_� QUICK COUPLER KEY AND CONNECTED TO A RAIN SENSOR SHUTOFF DEVICE AND MOISTURE SENSOR, PER PLAN. RAIN/SOLAR SENSOR, MOUNT SINGLE -OUTLET 10-32 THREADED INLET X BARB FINISH GRADE H05E SWIVEL �- ----- ------ 11 15. CONTRACTOR'S MAINTENANCE PERIOD SHALL NOT BE TERMINATED UNTIL THE AT BUILDING EAVE PER MFGRS. OUTLET EMITTER: ------------] FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE SATISFIED AND APPROVED BY THE LANDSGAPE SPECS. MUST BE EXPOSED TO RAIN BIRD XERI-BUG 1032 TOP OF MULCH -III- ARCHITECT: LD6 EAVE UNOBSTRUCTED THE SUN, EMITTER LINE FLUSHING _I i- QUICK COUPLER RAINFALL AND CLEAR OF VALVE WITH LOOSE KEY I$ VALVE BOX ENCLOSURE A. VALVES SHALL BE WIRED TO CONTROLLER IN SAME NUMERICAL SEG2UENGE AS IRRIGATION SPRAY. TL050MFV-1 - LOCKING COVER INDICATED ON PLANS. B. PROVIDE PLASTIC SEALED DIAGRAMMATIC PLAN OF SYSTEM IDENTIFYING STATION m`� ROUND PLASTID -'!'� ------------- - - NUMBERS AND AREA THEY WATER; MOUNT INSIDE EACH CONTROLLER. /\\� /\\POLYFLEX RISER VALVE BOX 1= I IIIII I I I I=I II= G. CONTRACTOR SHALL MOUNT �INrTHE AND ADAPTER FIN15H GRADE ////// - LANDSCA E ARCHITE T) NA PLASTIC S� EVECONTROLLER BOX. CONTRACTOR ����� /�\//A55EMBLY: RAIN POLYETHYLENE LATERAL RISER _ = 15 REG2U I RED TO USE MULTIPLE STARTS FOR EACH VALVE TO ACHIEVE DEEP WATERI N&. Q B BIRD PFR-FRA (OR EXHAUST HEADER) -i „ „ D. AS -BUILT DRAWINGS SHALL INCLUDE LOCATIONS OF ALL MAINS, VALVES, SOURCE + ® I PVC 50H 40 TEE OR ELL UNMORTARED BRICK O o U o U o U = L SUPPORTS (TWO) �O Oo0 Oo0 OoOoOC POLYETHYLENE TUBING RED BRA55 PEA GRAVEL SUMP 1100 ELBOW I CU. FT. OF ELECTRICAL POWER FOR CONTROLLER CLOCK, CONTROL WIRE SLEEVES, AND BELOW �1 r o O o C WITH STAINLESS STEEL z 50H. 40 PVC ADAPTS IF DIFFERENT THAN PLANS. LOCATE BY DIMENSIONING FROM TWO FIXED GRADE HEADSO PVC LATERAL PIPE O o 0 0 CLAMP � I GU. FT. MIN. GONG. c1bo 0°° GL 315 PVC MAINLINE O POINTS (CONTRACTOR MAY USE A BLUEPRINT OF THE SPRINKLER PLAN AND EDIT IN I nO I INSERT FEMALE ADAPTER THRUST BLOCK°d'o° .,°cP °° STD BRICK (4 REQ'D) PERMANENT RED INK FOR THE AS -BUILT DRAWIN6.) 3/4" GRAVEL SUMP I (SIZE AS REQ'D) W/ oo° Iq. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING TOOLS AND MATERIALS AS PART OF THIS CONTRACT: (I GUBIC FOOT) 1/2" FF N6 BUSHING MPT X n I/2 FPT o ° ° ° o A. ALL EQUIPMENT OPERATION MANUALS AND GUARANTEES. NOTE: RAIN BIRD XERI-BUG 10-32 THREADED INLET X BARB OUTLET EMITTERS N z ° B. I PLASTIC SEALED DIAGRAM OF SYSTEM AREAS. GET REDUCED PRINT FROM ARE AVAILABLE IN THE FOLLOHIN6 MODELS: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. xB-osPC-Io32 os GPH XB-IOPG-1032 1.0 GPH ==III=III =' COMPACTED OR III-III=III-III- RED BRASS NIPPLE G. I AS -BUILT DRAWIN65. XB-20PC-1032 2.0 GPH NATIVE 501E =1 =1 1= -"'-"' 8" LONG D. 2 SETS OF AUTOMATIC CONTROLLER KEYS FOR EACH CONTROLLER. E. I QUICK COUPLER VALVE KEYS AND I HOSE SWIVEL AND BIBB ASSEMBLIES. RAIN SOLAR SENSOR THREAI7EI7 EMITTER LINE PLUSH I NG VALVE OU I CK COUPLER VALVE IN BOX 1) NOT TO 50ALE NOT TO SCALE NOT TO 50ALE OT TO SG marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited rasp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) 0 w} J =z 0o a~ U U <a U mU_ nw } C <U w � '� U)M 0= H wo w o� o0 ❑o ❑o zw c❑ cn z zw gz LO 1­❑ D oa w � 0 J L Q = � U Lo r � OY NQ oU_ U0 Nw Uo o= ❑ L aw L Cdw EJ J Q OC/) Uj Lo Q N DO J a m D m � m m a C a Z in 0 ? z SQ z w a a o m a a a a ��I avenue So San Dielourgh ot CA921021 www.asoteio.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet • 0 r co - do T T 0 r— — — — — — — — — — I I I I I I L— — — — — — — — — — 162'-1 " VACUUM CANOPY ---------------------- 120'-0" 41800 SF CAR WASH TENANT IMPk%JVEMENT NOT A PART OF THIS SUBMITTAL r-- C A1.2 q , L, I co NO I I O Lo I I I I O � I L. 5'-0" 8'-0" 5'-0" 18'-0" 40'-10" I 69000 SF 1 STORY BUILDING CONVENIENCE 0 co STORE AND DELI — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I I I I I I — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 23'-6" rENANt ►.hr .:0VEMENT A PART OF THIS SUBMITTAL 0 M aiii I 0 I� I /D I A1.2 I I I I � I I I I I L— — — — — — — — — — — — — — L- - ---- ----- -------------- --------J 7-0" 19'-6" 7-0" 40'-10" 18'-0" 151 '-2" A A1.1 BUILDING FLOOR PLAN 5GALE:1/8"=1'-0" marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) O W } = J 2 Z CO Q ~ w cn Q° U �a M O m � kc) C3 n w } �_ Q � d 0- •� d H m H O WLL LU U) � Z Z U O m 0 � Z W Q p cn Z Z W a_ MZ Oa a_U) W� m0 J W U //�� Lo Q o2 Y NQ NLL U� 0� W U0 LLU W (� i� 0 W J E J Q U c=, L L m Q N rGo 0 Q J Q W � z z Q J V O Z 0 z H O z � =i o U) z LU cc Q clf Z 0 IL C A Rcti C-26463 J 4 Cf) --1 `P 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet A1.0 MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COOPER COLOR COLOR: COPPER METAL ROOF 32'-2" TOP OF TOWER COOPER COLOR 26'-6" MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS METAL ROOF TOP OF TOWER COLOR: SW6108 LATTE DELI MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS 19 0s', /j COLOR: SW6108 LATTE 1, 77 ma, TOP OF PARAPETir ir r �C/L%��� x. T rir, i L H MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS MFR:EL DORADO STONE MFR:EL DORADO STONE MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE BUILDIN651 AND 2 IAEST ELEVATION ZA SCALE: I/8"= I' MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR: SW6108 LATTE OIL 19'-0" — ALUMINIUM CANOPY TOP OF PARAPET MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE n n n n n n n n L SELF -SERVE VACUUM o FOR CAR WASH TYPICAL. fs . MF:EL DOA COLOR:GOLDEDNOOAOK EDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGIGWHITE BUILDIN65 I AND 2 BAST ELEVATION Ze SCALE: I/8"= I' marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning teed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) w} J 2 Z UO Q ~ w cn Q° U �a M O m � kc) C3 n w } C_ Q � d w •� d H m H 0 wLL ul 2 U) Z Z O O0 00 0 p Z W Q p cn Z Z w a_ MZ Oa a_U) w� m0 J w J Q = � U //�� Lo Q OU) Y NQ N� U� 0� -w w r o U� �LU w � 2 N z �Q CO m J E J Q U c=, LU m Q r N LO m r T Go Q J a W v z z Q J V O z or-L z 0 W U) z w a af z 0 °. A Rcti j C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `PA 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www, marksarchitects.com Job Number ISheet ALI /,n/l n CM (,rl1 rlM COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT BUILDINGS I AND 2 NORTH ELEVATION SGALE: I/8"= I' COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT 5UILDIN&51 AND:2 SOUTH ELEVAT I ON marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 c) U w} =z ¢U Q� U Q° U �a M U m� D ow } C:_ Q� wUD .� aM H 0 w �w U� o0 ❑o ❑o zW Q ❑ Un z zw gz oa d 0 w� MU J W J Q = � Lo Q o2 Y NQ NU- U� 0� -w W t O U� �LU w of Nz �Q 0w J E J Q U U=, L L m Q r C4 IA rGo T Q 40 r M 0 Q J a W � z z Q J M 0) C.)z Z p z H O z � D o U) z LU cc v CIf Z 0 © a n. A Rcti j . C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `P 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Isheet 14-10" TOP OF CANOPY VACUUM CANOPY TOP OF TOWER BUILDING ROOF PLAN SGALE: I/8"= I'-O" 162-1 " NOTE: ALL ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY PARAPET marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) U w} = J 2 Z �O Q ~ w CO Q° U �a M U m U-C3 n w } �_ Q � d UD w •� d H H 0 wul U) Z Z O O0 00 0 p Z W Q p Un Z Z W a_ MZ Oa d 0 w� mU J W J Q = � Lo Q o2 Y NQ NU- U� 0� -w w r o Uif �a_ w of Nz �Q 0w J E J Q U c=, L L m Q r C4 IA rGo T Q 40 r M 0 LL J ¢ W � z z ¢ J n z C.)0 Z 0 H O z � -j o U) z w ¢ clf z 0 © a n. A Rcti j C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `P 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Isheet A1.5 59' 8" ' L BUMPER TYPICAL POST I COLUMN I i BUMPER TYPICAL i POST; CONTROL JOINTS � _ _ I CONTROL JOINTS TYPICAL U.O.N. TYPICAL U.O.N. ENANT IMP VEMEwT NOT PART OF T IS SURMIErmw. BUMPER TYPICAL POST I _ _ GAS STATION CANCFY FLOOR PLAN SGALE:1/8"=1'-O" 159'-8" 15'-10" 32'-0" 32'-0" 32'-0" II II II IIII Illl IIII O IIII O ® IIII O O IIII IIIII ILII IIIII LT 00 II II II IIII IIII IIII IIII. IIII IIII IIIII II'Il IIIII II II II IIII IIII IIII I I I N °� O O O O O O Ln III o 18'-6" TOP OF CANOPY 0'-0" TOP OF SLAB GAS STATION CANCF%( BIDE EELVATION 0 18'-6" TOP OF CANOPY 0'-0" TOP OF SLAB 0 0 DI 0 w 0 9 GAS STATION CANOFY ROOF PLAN SGALE:1/8"=1'-O" MwelY O GAS STATION OANCFY FRONT ELEVATION marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U w} = J = Z cO a~ U Q° U �a m} U � kc) V C) w Ir C_ Q � a_•� w� d IT 0 H w0 w � U U O w ❑O LL ¢o cn z zw gz a OQ wU) ~ w J w Q U U Q o� Y NQ NLL U 0� �+ w U � i� w C Nz �Q (d w J Q OT LO L,o^ Q NMn W N_ MM T T 0r Q wrw Z 0 H J ¢ co p Z Z Q J DcoV O Z 00 Zz H Z 0 W Cn Z Ww V Q 6 Z Ja at U a © a C3 A Rcti C-26463 J A\ CJ> 9-30-2017 r, RENEWAL DATE F OF CIIO ncarb certified www, morksarchitects. com Job Number Sheet A:2.o SGALE: I/8"=1'-0" SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" orv.l GAR WASH ENTRY CANOPY FLOOR FLAN 5GALE:1/8"=1'-0" Al i INAINnJM CANOPY o,L 18'-61' TOP OF CANOPY ot 6'_0" TOP OF SLAB GAR WASH ENTRY CANOPY FRONT ELEVATION 5GALE:1/8"=1'-0" 18'-6" TOP OF CANOPY OIL o'-o" TOP OF SLAB GAR WASH ENTRY CANOPY SIDE ELEVATION 5GALE:1/8"=1'-0" marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U w} = J = Z 00 Q� U)w Q° U �a- r U m � kc) V 0 w m Q ci> a_ d LLJ •� d H V H 0 wLL w � Z U CE O m p0 Q 0 Z w Q p cn z zw 0- Uj CIO it Z OQ a_U) w� m 0 J W J Q = U L Q o� Y NQ N� U 0� -w w t 0 U� iCd Nz �Q �U w Cdif E J Q (4.-) LO L,o^ W MM T Q NMn N_ T 0r Q wrw Z 0 Q J Q co p Z Z Q J coV O � 00 Z 0 Z U W Cn Z Ww V Q LU Z Ja U a © a A Rcti C-26463 J A\ CJ> 9-30-2017 r, RENEWAL DATE F cF CAS ncarb certified www, morksarchitects. com Job Number ISheet A:2.1 h 26'-0" 73'-9" 20'-11 " r--I --TI--TT-1r-I TI--TT-1r-ITI--TT--IT -- --1 I III II III II III II I I II II II II II t� I I II II II II II I I I II I II II II II II I II I C9 I II I II II II II II I II I I II I II II II II II I II I � I I II II II II II I I I II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I 0 I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I N I II II II II II II II II II I r I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I I II II II II II II II II II I 0 2, 300 SF I I 1 STORY BUILDING � I I I 26'-10" TENANT IMPROVEMENT NOT A PART OF Cp THIS SUBMITTAL COL------------ I I I I I I I I I I I I I -___ J E BUILDING 3 FLOOR PLAN SGALE: I/8"= I'-O" BUILDING 3 ROOF PLAN A3.1 NOTE: ALL ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY PARAPET marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) H O w} = J 2 Z CO Q ~ w cn Q° U M O m � kc) C3 n w } C_ Q � d w •� a- H m H 0 wLL w 2 U) Z Z U O 0 00 00 ZW Q 0 cn Z Z w a_ MZ Oa a_U) w� m0 J w J Q = U //�� Lo Q o2 Y NQ NLL U� 0� .w w r 0 U� �LU w (d Nz �Q 0 w J J Q U c=, L L m Q r N � � r T Go Q 40 r M 0 Q J a W � z z Q J w 0) C.)O Z p z H O z � =i o U) z LU clf Z U © < a a Sr,V A Rcy j C-26463 J � 4 `P 9-30-2017 r >, RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Isheet SGALE: I/8"= I'-O" A5.0 MFR:SHERWIN""' '"""" COLOR: COPPE oL 26'-6" TOP OF TOWER OL 19'-0" TOP OF PARAPE' COLOR: SW6108 LATTEv COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT BUILDING 3 NORTH ELEVATION /, AACE).OLJC)\A/IKI %A/II I IAAAO UULUM:5VVblUf LA IL UULUH,UULULIN UAKLLUULUUI BUILDIN& 5 SOUTH ELEVATION D SCALE: 1/8"= I' 26'-6" _ TOP OF TOWER 19'-0" TOP OF PARAPET 13-0" _ TOP OF PARAPET COLOR: SW6108 LATTE BUILDING 3 WEST ELEVATION SCALE: I/8"= P A Arn.L�I Irn\A/IKI \ All I I IA"AC� _ 26'-6" TOP OF TOWER MFR:SHER% COLOR:SW _ 19'-011 TOP OF PARAPET - 1-.,RADO STONE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT MFR:S, , COLOR: SW6108 LATTE BUILDING 3 EABT ELEVATION SGALE:1/8"=1' IVII 1 I.- -J I -( V I VI VE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT 26'-6" TOWER 19'-0" )ARAPET 13 -0' o- )ARAPET marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) U w} = J 2 Z C� Q� U Q° U �a M U m � kc) C3 n w } C_ Q � 0— .� U) 0 H o wLL �w UIr o0 ❑o ❑o zW Q ❑ cn z Z W a_ MZ oa a_U) w� MU J W J Q = � U //�� Lo Q o2 Y NQ LL U� 0� -w w r o U� �LU w of 2 H (n Z Q 0 w J E J Q U U) LU a m Q N r Q 40 r M O H a J a W � z z Q J 0) V z Z p z H O z � "' o U) z LU cc v Z [4FI °. S ,V A RCti J C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `P 9-30-2017 —F,X RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CALICO ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet A5.1 row A A4.1 r 0 r --- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 23'-1 " 23'-1 " 37-8" 6'-9" 8'-4" 4'-0" 8'-3" 6'-9" 6'-2" 1, 6-9" 6-2" 17'-2" 4'-7" 15'-2" F----— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ---- I I I I I I I I I I I I 31700 SF 1 STORY BUILDING TENAw--1 IMPROVEMENT NOT A PART OF i'NIS SUBMITTAL 6'-9" 1, 8'-5" [ 4'-0" [ 8'-3" A( A4.1 BUILDING 4 FLOOR PLAN SGALE:1/8"= P-O" BUILDING 4 ROOF PLAN 5GALE:1/8"=1'-0" 38'-0" q O 10 c A4.1 NOTE: ALL ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY PARAPET marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) H O W } = J 2 Z CO Q ~ w cn Q° U �a M O m� kc) C3 nw } Q U) d W� •� aM W n O W LL W 2 U) D Z O O0 00 00 ZW Q 0 cn Z Z W a_ MZ Oa a_U) W MO J W J Q = � U //�� Lo Q o2 Y NQ NLL U� 0� -w W r 0 U� �LU W of rn z �Q 0W J E J Q U c=, L L m Q r C4 � � r T Go Q 40 r M 0 Q J a W � z z Q J w 0) C.)O Z p z H O z � =i o U) z LU cc clf Z U �©<a IL A Rcti j C-26463 f- `P 9-30-2017 r x RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number sheet A4.0 ot 28'-6" TOP OF TOWER ot 19'-0" TOP OF PARAPE MFR:EL DOR V I VI VL COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT ot 19'-0" ______ TOP OF PARAPET oL 13'-0" BOTTOM OF TRELLIS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE v BUILDIN64 SOUTH ELEVATION SGALE: I/8"= I' f�nnnrn r�f-11I r-�n _LIAMS _ 28'-6" TOP OF TOWER _ 19'-0" TOP OF PARAPET ` MFH:SHERWIN WILLIAMS ` MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR: SW6108 LATTE J COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR: SW6108 LATTECOLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE BUILDING 4 NORTH ELEVATION SGALE: I/8"= I' (,.nnPER COLOR �L ROOF :SHERWIN WILLIAMS OR:COPPER BUILDING 4 WEST ELEVATION SGALE: I/8"= I' A Arn.t•l Irn\A/IAI %A/II I Inn ACC IVIrn.,Dl ICnVVIIV VVILLIFUVIJ 1— . —, '"'•""` •"����� ��°"' COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE BUILDING 4 EAST ELEVATION SGALE: I/8"= I' 19'-0" 'ARAPET marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 Un U w} = J 2 Z �O Q ~ w Un Q° U �a M U m� D oLU w } Q� w� .� U) H 0 wL w U� o0 ❑o ❑o zW Q ❑ Un z zw gz oa wC/) w� MU J w J Q = � Lo Q o2 Y NQ to U- U0 0� -w w t O Uif �a_ w (d N z �Q 0 w J E J Q U UU) LU LO L Q r C4 � � r T Go Q 40 r M O H a J a W � z z Q J w 0) C.)z Z p z H O z � D o U) z LU cc v clf Z U © a n. A Rcti C-26463 'P� n J � � CJ) 1 `PA 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet A4.1 422'-10" 193-11 " 35'-0" 193-11 " 6'-8" 45'-3" T-8" 32'-11 " 7'-8" 65-4" 28'-6" 28'-6" 65'-4" T-8" 32'-11 " 7-8" 45'-3" 6'-8" r------------------------ ----�--- I I -----------------------� I r--------------------I- I I I r—� --------------------- --- , I I �p I I I I I I I ri In In In In In In In In II II II II II II II II III I I I I I I _ m — = I I — H— I --I----------- — - ------------ II II I � II II I 00FYI I I II II II II II II II II III II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II III I I II II II II I II II j I II II II II II II II II II I F'� FYI FYIII II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II II II II II II II II IIII II II II II II II II II I II II II II II II II II III II II II II II II II II tll I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IL�ING 5 I I I I I I II II II II II II II II ul II II II II II II II II III LL -4 Iµ5LU U_U —U U—U Ulu I I I I I I I I I I II II "U BLUILDIN6 -----_--+11J—�µLL--1J—�µLL-414J J L------- I III I III I I I I I I I I I I I I I i TENANT iiwirwROVE MLn I i i I I i I i I i I ml�° ruI IMPhluIvnivic��i 1 Ln I I I NOT A PART OF I I I I I NOT A PAR J I I 1•HIS SUBMITTAL I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I THIS SUBMITTAL I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 180'-8" I I I I 49'-6" I I I I I I 180'-8" I I BLU I LD I N65 5$6 FIRST fzLOOR PLAN TRUE REFERNCE 422'-10" 193-11 " 35'-0" 193-11 " 6'-8" 45'-3" 7'-8" 32'-11 " 7-8" 65'-4" 28'-6" 28'-6" 65'-4" 7-8" 32'-11 " 7'-8" 45'-3" " 6'-8 -----------------------� I r------------------------ I I I I I I ri In In In In In In n k, II II II II II II II II III I —— — I —1-1—��—FF-1-I—��—FF—i-I—��—IFF— —il—Ir—IT--n Ir—IT-71--1r—Irr— II II I I II II II II II II II II III II II II II II II II II III I I II �� � II I� II II I I FV1 FYI II II II II II II II II III II II II II II II II II III II II II II II II II II III I I II II II �� I I I I I II II II II II II II II III II II II II II II II II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II II II II II II II II III II II II II II II II II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5 I I I I I I II II II II II II II II III II II II II II II II II II _1JBLUILDIN6 I I I I I I I I I I ul_. I I I I I BLIJILDIN& 6 r r I I I I I I I I I I I I ------j L ------ I I I I I I I I I I LO Co I I I I I I TENANT IMPROVEMENT I I I I I I I I I I '"NANT IMPROVEMEN I I I I I I I ; NOT A PART OFLO ; ; I I ; ; I ; I ; I ; NOT A PART OF I I I I 1•HIS SUBMITTAP I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I THIS SUBMITTAL I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 49'-6" I I I I I I I I I 180'-8" I I I I I I 180'-8" BLU I LD I N65 rpI6 5ECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE: IA(b 1'-0" TRUE REFERNCE 10 marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited rasp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) U w} J 2 Z �O Q� U Q° U �a M U m LL kc) D ow C:_ Q� 0— .::3 a m H 0 wLL w 2 � D Z U O0 00 0 p Z W Q p cn Z Z W a_ MZ Oa a_U) w� mU J W J Q = � U Lo O2 Y NQ NILL U� 0� = w t O U� s` w ad Nz m 0 w J E J Q U c=, U ILA f Q N N Go Q r M v 0 ¢ J ¢ W 0 v z z ¢ J V 0 Z p z H O z 0 "' o U z LULU v ¢ Q!f z A Rcti j C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `PA 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com lFn7►I TiTN ISheet A5.0 METAL COPING - COLOR COOPER I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \I I ------------- / STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF COLOR COOPER n n n n n n n II II II II II II II --,�--�+--H--��-1---I--fi- 7r-rr-T1-7r-rr-il-Ir -1 L__LL_1J_JL_LL_-w I �H-4::-H::-4 ::-H--4 II II II II II II II u u u u u u u STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF COLOR COOPER / I I BLUILDIN65 rp$& ROOF PLAN SCALE: I A 6 " = I'-0" ®_rM rM r- METAL COPING COLOR COOPER L-- r-- / / I NOTE: ALL ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY PARAPET D D p ID TRUE REFERNCE 69 marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited rasp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) U w} J 2 Z CO Q ~ U Q° U �a M U m LL kc) C3 ow } C_ Q� 0— a m H 0 wLL w 2 U) D Z U O0 00 0 p Z LL1 Q p cn Z Z W a_ MZ Oa a_U) w� mU J W J Q = � L/� U A Q o2 Y NQ NLL U� 0� -w w r o U� �LU w of Nz �Q 0w J E J Q U c=, L L m Q N rGo Q 40 r M It 0 Q J a W v z z Q J w 0) C.)z Z p z H O z 0 "' o U) z LU cc v LU clf Z cc 0 © a °. A Rcti j C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `PA 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www, marksarchitects.com Job Number Isheet A5.1 ot 40'-0" TOP OF ROOF ot 30'-6" TOP OF PARA ot 15'-0" SECOND FLO( MFR:SHERV.— .I1—„1�I- COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE oL 40'-0" TOP OF ROC oL 30'-6" TOP OF PAR, ot 15'-0" SECOND FL( 5' HIGH SCREENING WALL NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY CVW CHA COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR: SW6108 LATTE v COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT nr_nnrn nil /-In COLOR: SW6108 LATTE v NOTE: ALL ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY PARAPET rAT&TAl.7-J.lATAlOral K COLOR: SW6108 LATTEv COLOR: SW6364 EGGWHITE BLUILDIN&5 rp$& NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16"=1' — , ,L, ,..,�..✓ILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR: SW6364 EGGWHITE COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR: SW6364 EGGWHITE NOT SHOWN FOR COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT CLARITY COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR: SW6108 LATTE 5LUILDIN6 rp EABT ELEVATION SGALE: I/16"= I' _ 30'-6" -OP OF PARAPET _ 15'-0" Ah SECOND FLOOR 3WIN WILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE oL 40'-0" TOP OF ROO[ oL 30'-6" TOP OF PARA oL 15'-0" SECOND FLO COLOR: SW6108 LATTE BLUILDIN65 5$6 BOUTH ELEVATION rin noco r1ni no 15LUILDIN65 6 WEST ELEVATION SCALE: I/16"= I' (BETWEEN BUILDINGS) ID ,NNEL marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) 0 w} = J 2 Z CO Q ~ w cn Q° U �a M O m � kc) C3 n w } C_ Q � d w •� d H m H 0 wLL w t 2 U) D ::) o0 ❑o ❑o zW Q ❑ cn z Z w a_ MZ oa IL U) w� mU J w J Q = U //�� Lo Q o2 Y NQ to LL U� 0� �+ w r o U� �LU w � 2 N z �Q m 0 w J E J Q U c=, L L m Q r C4 IA m r T Go Q 40 r M It 0 J ¢ W v z z ¢ J V O Z p H H z V w z LU v ¢ LU clf z CC A )?C C-26463 � J � � CJ) ­1 `PA 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number sheet A5.2 ,Y u MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COOPER COLOR COLOR. COPPER METAL ROOF =4 - .: r OL 32'-2" tiiif TOP OF TOWER hr \ '1 COOPER COLOR METAL ROOF 26'-6" MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS i ir ir ir ir ir TOP OF TOWER COLOR: SW6108 LATTE G` a� DELI ., MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS - COLOR: SW6108 LATTE IL�7 TOP OF PARAPETr ir i Chit Z 4- MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS MFR:EL DORADO STONE MFR:EL DORADO STONE MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE BU I L:� I N65 I ANC 2 IAEST ELEVATION ZA SGALE: I/8"= I' s` l I�� MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR: SW6108 LATTE OIL 19'-0" ``' — ALUMINIUM CANOPY TOP OF PARAPET MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE A& Ak 46� A& A& A SELF -SERVE VACUUM o FOR CAR WASH TYPICAL. fs . MF:EL DOA COLOR:GOLDEDNOOAOK EDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGIGWHITE BUILI;)IN65 I AN� 2 BAST ELEVATION Ze SGALE: I/8"= I' marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited Gasp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 Un U w} J 2 Z CO Q ~ w Un Q° U �a M U m � C3 n w } C_ Q � d w •� d H H 0 LL ul 2 � Z Z O O0 00 0 p Z W Q p Un Z Z w gz it � Z M Oa a_ wC m U J w U //�� CE Lo Q o N o U 0� -w w r o U� w � N z �Q �UJ �w m J E J Q U UU) LU m Q N r Q 40 r M 0 Q J a W LL � z z Q J V 0 z0)0ZI.- z 0 W U) z w a z A Rcti j C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `PA 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l7 F OF CAL\�O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number ISheet /,n/l n CM (,rl1 rlM COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT BUILDINGS I AND 2 NORTH ELEVATION SGALE: I/8"= I' COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT 5UILDIN&51 AND:2 SOUTH ELEVAT I ON marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 c) U w} =z ¢U Q� U Q° U �a M U m� D ow } C:_ Q� wUD .� aM H 0 w �w U� o0 ❑o ❑o zW Q ❑ Un z zw gz oa d 0 w� MU J W J Q = � Lo Q o2 Y NQ NU- U� 0� -w W t O U� �LU w of Nz �Q 0w J E J Q U U=, L L m Q r C4 IA rGo T Q 40 r M 0 Q J a W � z z Q J M 0) C.)z Z p z H O z � D o U� Z LU cc V CIf Z 0 © a n. A Rcti j . C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `P 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Isheet ARI.:2 MFR:SHERWIN COLOR: COPPE oL 26'-6" TOP OF TOWER OL 19'-0" TOP OF PARAPE' COLOR: SW6108 LATTEv COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT BUILDING 3 NORTH ELEVATION /, UULUM:5VVblUf LA IL UULUH,UULULIN UAKLLUULUUI BUILDIN& 5 SOUTH ELEVATION D SCALE: 1/8"= I' 26'-6" _ TOP OF TOWER 19'-0" TOP OF PARAPET 13-0" _ TOP OF PARAPET IVII 11.- -J I -( V I VIAL COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT BUILDING 3 WEST ELEVATION SCALE: I/8"= P A Arn.L�I Irn\A/IAI \ All I I IAA ACC _ 26'-6" TOP OF TOWER MFR:SHER% COLOR:SW _ 19'-011 TOP OF PARAPET - I-.,RADO STONE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT MFR:S, , COLOR: SW6108 LATTE BUILDING 3 EABT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8"=1' 26'-6" TOWER 19'-0" )ARAPET 13 -0' o- )ARAPET marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) U w} = J 2 Z C� Q� U Q° U �a M U m � kc) C3 n w } C_ Q � 0— .� U) 0 H o wLL �w UIr o0 ❑o ❑o zW Q ❑ cn z Z W gz a— _ cn cn — �❑ oa a_U) w� MU J W J Q = � U //�� Lo Q o2 Y NQ NLL U� 0� -w w r o U� �LU w of 2 H (n Z Q 0 w J E J Q U U) LU a m Q N r Q 40 r M O H a J a W � z z Q J 0) V z Z p z H O z � "' o U) Z LU cc V Z [4FI °. S ,V A RCti J C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `P 9-30-2017 —F,X RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CALICO ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Sheet AR5.1 ot 28'-6" TOP OF TOWER ot 19'-0" TOP OF PARAPE MFR:EL DOR V I VI VL COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT ot 19'-0" _ TOP OF PARAPET oL 13'-0" BOTTOM OF TRELLIS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE v BUILDIN64 SOUTH ELEVATION SGALE: I/&"= I' _LIAMS _ 28'-6" TOP OF TOWER _ 19'-0" TOP OF PARAPET ` MFH:SHERWIN WILLIAMS ` MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR: SW6108 LATTEJ COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE BUILDING 4 NORTH ELEVATION SGALE: I/8"= I' ,PER COLOR �L ROOF :SHERWIN WILLIAMS OR:COPPER BUILDING 4 WEST ELEVATION SGALE: I/8"= I' IVIrn.,.7I ICnVVIIV VVILLIFUVIJ 1— . —, --- II —` I"1-111— COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE BUILDING 4 EAST ELEVATION SGALE: I/&"= I' 19,-0" 'ARAPET marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 Un U w} = J 2 Z �O Q ~ w Un Q° U �a M U m� C3 oLU w } Q� w� .� U) H 0 wL w U� o0 ❑o ❑o zW Q ❑ Un z zw gz oa wC/) w� MU J w J Q = � Lo Q o2 Y NQ to U- U0 0� -w w t O Uif �a_ w (d N z �Q 0 w J E J Q U UU) L L m Q r N IA r T Go Q r M O H a J a W � z z Q J 0) V z Z p z H O z � =i o U) z LU cc clf Z U © a n. AJ. Rcti C-26463 J � � CJ) 1 `P 9-30-2017 r� RENEWAL DATE l� F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number Isheet A4.1 rX ■P OF ROOFJON f`Lt OF PARAPET 151-011 MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR:SW 6364 EGGWHITE FEIGN$] 'r TOP OF ROC oL 30'-6" TOP OF PAR, 15'-0" SECOND FL( 5' HIGH SCREENING WALL NOT SHOWN FOR CLARITY CVW CHA MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE t\ _ COOPER COLOR METAL ROOF "`- ALUMINUM CORBEL MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR: COPPER TEIln[IT 1 MEN 0 G x r MFR:EL DORADO STONE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COOPER COLOR METAL ROOF _ � I■I■I■I■I■I■I■L 1 M1 11 w r y f. 7� Ail i MAD 1� MFR:EL DORADO STONE COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT IKE MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE NOTE: ALL ROOF TOP EQUIPMENT TO BE SCREENED BY PARAPET COOPER COLOR METAL ROOF TENANT I ILA' THY11-U-1] I U_1__ MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS MFR:SHERWIN WILLIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR: SW6364 EGGWHITE COLOR: SW6108 LATTE BLUILDIN&5 rp$& NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/I6"=1' COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR: SW6364 EGGWHITE COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR: SW6364 EGGWHITE NOT SHOWN FOR COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT CLARITY BLUILDIN65 5$6 COLOR:GOLDEN OAKLEDGECUT COLOR: SW6108 LATTE 5LIJILI�IN6 5 EABT ELEVATION SGALE: I/Ib"= I' 40'-0" TOP OF ROO[ 30 -6' oL 30'-61' ARAPET "F TOP OF PARA 15'-0" 15'-0" FLOOR SECOND FLO LIAMS COLOR: SW6108 LATTE COLOR: SW6108 LATTE BOUTH ELEVATION 15LIJIL:IIN65 6 AE5T ELEVAT I ON SGALE: I/16"= I' (BETWEEN BUILDINGS) ID ,NNEL marks architects architecture interior design retail restaurants space planning master planning leed accredited casp 2643 fourth ave. san diego ca 92103 619-702-9448 71905 hwy 111 #f rancho mirage ca 92270 760-610-5264 U) 0 w} = J 2 Z CO Q ~ w cn Q° U �a M O m � C3 n w } C_ Q � d w •� d H m H 0 wLL ul 2 � Z o0 00 00 zW Q 0 cn z Z w gz a_- LO MZ oa a_U) w� m0 J w J Q = U //�� Lo Q o2 Y NQ to LL U� 0� �+ w r o U� �LU w � 2 N z �Q m 0 w J E J Q U U) II L L m Q r C4 IA m r T Go Q 40 r M 0 LL J ¢ W v z z ¢ J U O Z p H H z V ''' U) Z LU V ¢ LU clf zat CC A Rcti C-26463 '�- n J � � CJ) -1 `P 9-30-2017 r� RWENEWAL DATE l7 F OF CAL��O ncarb certified www.marksarchitects.com Job Number sheet AR5.2 40 30 I I I WASHINGTON STREET 1 w U R OUTLINE OF APPROVED ''LA PALOMA" I DEVELOPMENT I � I I I 2 I I I New NEW LAN.CA UECEL. I PARKWAY 7 I� wNE YELLOW SHADED AREA DENOTES EXISTING GRADE BLUE SHADED AREA DENOTES PROPOSED GRADE APPROVED La Pa.Lor:;i DEVELOPM PROPOSED WASHINGTON 50 PROJECT GAS CANOPY AMPM � ,1 , - - EDLFLL - E 2 STORY RETAIL BUILDING � a " R 65' HIGHPOWER LINES I 472'-0" LA Q U I NTA EVACUATION CHANNEL HARRY S. TRUMAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LA. QUINTA FAIRWAYS LA Q U I NTA FAIRWAYS .50 I �40 �30 SITE SECTION SCALE: 111=30'-0" CHANDi GRoup 2t1���0�, 50 '1„� marks USA April ,9.zo,a la quinta, ca architE)cts i 1 — x I' j - 1 i # t t .r. I r r r r �r ,s i r 1 r !ij s 4of y� RiL e ry'y� - _ z.• „ uiK 1::Yb��J,� a if+Jan �.�.LV'�,dl. 9 f N";.i'. ♦t J..A<"I..R �"kw'wf�'.Tlla`1'ka.: .. , M 1499 M�q kip - ---i��"r_�-sue•'' - � � 't ': i I, I : � -,, ..:- ��` xx�"�ssw==,r.:. ��- - - —a ...-."�1lIS,R^ I r s eti k T 1 x ->w 1 •a� I .. :ix ...- - � �„ nnnr nnnhdllll IIIL �AAfr'PmUI' I . al t cc. r � - ^•- Ili+'_ .. al aa: a w. n „5 s t a t v: , - - _ 'F Fy'r< w,ir s r .:.a - VIEW �,��=,may, vy 1 \ 99 y 1 > w d t•? =v� 4\ It _ s- - - '. ;�, . .a:: ,..., �.:. � •.. 1. -_ . :. , .�,, . V , � 6 , I i , k v� V 1 r , (I r C L r Y r \ A t. I J 1- 1 VIEW LOOKING NORTH-WEST FROM LA QUINTA FAIRWAYS CHANDi GRoup 0 marks USA � 10'i100e ' ar hit(DctsAPRIL 19, 2o,b la quanta, ca c ATTACHMENT 4 SAGUARO RD CALLE SEAMA CALLERENSE Medium/High Density Residential CALLE FELIPE to General Commercial 50TH AVE U) z O O z_ O z w CO J V U O� GPS N AVE NIDA ULTIMO Case: General Plan Amendment 2015-0001 ATTACHMENT 5 SAGUARO RD CALLE-SEAMA CgLL=RENSE CALLE-FEL-IPE 50TH AVE RM to CC z 0 z w c/) O � z w � Ak J v U OQ� O N AVENIDA-ULTIMO Case: Zone Change 2015-0002 ATTACHMENT 6 General Plan Amendment Required Findings (9.230.020 Review procedures and findings) 1. Internal General Plan Consistency. The amendment is internally consistent with those goals, objectives and policies of the general plan which are not being amended. 2. Public Welfare. Approval of the amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. 3. General Plan Compatibility. In the case of amendments to the general plan policy diagram, the new designation is compatible with the designations on adjacent properties. 4. Property Suitability. In the case of amendments to the general plan policy diagram, the new designation is suitable and appropriate for the subject property. 5. Change in Circumstances. In the case of amendments to the general plan policy diagram, approval of the amendment is warranted because the situation and the general conditions of the property have substantially changed since the existing designation was imposed. (Ord. 367 § 1, 2002; Ord. 284 § 1, 1996) Zone Change Required Findings (9.220.010 Zone changes and prezoning) 1. Consistency with General Plan. The zone change is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the general plan. 2. Public Welfare. Approval of the zone change will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. 3. Land Use Compatibility. The new zoning is compatible with the zoning on adjacent properties. 4. Property Suitability. The new zoning is suitable and appropriate for the subject property. 5. Change in Circumstances. Approval of the zone change is warranted because the situation and the general conditions of the property have substantially changed since the existing zoning was imposed. (Ord. 367 § 1, 2002; Ord. 284 § 1, 1996) Site Development Permit Required Findings (9.210.010.F Authority) 1. Consistency with General Plan. The project is consistent with the general plan. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The project is consistent with the provisions of this zoning code. 3. Compliance with CEQA. Processing and approval of the permit application are in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 4. Architectural Design. The architectural design of the project, including, but not limited to, the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style and other architectural elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city. 5. Site Design. The site design of the project, including, but not limited to, project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment and trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city. 6. Landscape Design. Project landscaping, including, but not limited to, the location, type, size, color, texture and coverage of plant materials, has been designed so as to provide visual relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between adjacent land uses and between development and open space, and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual continuity of the project. Tentative parcel Map Required Findings (13.12.130 Mandatory findings of approval) 1. The proposed map or vesting map is consistent with the city general plan and any applicable specific plans. 2. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the city general plan and any applicable specific plans. 3. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. 4. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 5. The site of the proposed subdivision is physically suitable for the type of development and proposed density of development. 6. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable provisions of this title and the La Quinta Zoning Ordinance, including, but not limited to, minimum lot area requirements, any other applicable provisions of this code, and the Subdivision Map Act. 7. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. (Ord. 467 § 1, 2009; Ord. 295 § 1, 1997; Ord. 272 § 1, 1995) Conditional Use Permit Required Findings (9.210.020 Conditional use permits and minor use permits) 1. Consistency with General Plan. The land use is consistent with the general plan. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The use is consistent with the provisions of this zoning code. 3. Compliance with CEQA. Processing and approval of the permit application are in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 4. Surrounding Uses. Approval of the application will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare or injurious to or incompatible with other properties or land uses in the vicinity. ATTACHMENT 7 ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES WEDNESDAY. DECEMBER 16. 2015 CALL TO ORDER A special meeting of the La Quinta Architectural and Landscaping Review Board was called to order at 10:05 a.m. by Planning Manager Gabriel Perez. PRESENT: Board Members Richard Gray, Kevin McCune, and Ray Rooker ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Gabriel Perez, Principal Planner Jay Wuu, Principal Planner Wally Nesbit, Principal Engineer Bryan McKinney, Executive Assistant Monika Radeva, Executive Assistant Wanda Wise -Latta, and Administrative Technician Dianne Hansen Board Member McCune led the Board into the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENT - None CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA - Confirmed APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Board Members Gray/McCune to approve the Architectural and Landscaping Review Board Minutes of October 7, 2015 as submitted. Motion passed unanimously. BUSINESS SESSION 1. Site Development Permit 2014-1006 submitted by George Velarde proposing the construction of a parking lot, landscaping, and lighting improvements for a vehicle storage lot for Torre Nissan on approximately 3.5 acres. Project: Torre Nissan Vehicle Storage Lot. Location: southeast corner of Adams Street and Auto Centre Drive. Principal Planner Jay Wuu presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING SPECIAL MEETING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES 1 DECEMBER 16, 2015 Public Speaker: Mr. George Velarde, Applicant, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and gave a detailed presentation of the project. Discussion followed regarding sidewalk requirements along the entire site perimeter, zoning, specific plan requirements, allowed uses, lighting over the retention basin, parking, gate and proposed landscape palette. The Board recommended upsizing the proposed 24-inch box Palos Verde to 36- inch box and the addition of at least two Washingtonia Robusta palm trees at the vehicular driveway entrance on Auto Centre Drive to better identify the entrance of the project. Public Speaker: Mr. Dennis Lubas, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and said that all businesses and residents within the city are required to maintain their properties based on standards established by the City. He emphasized the importance of keeping the entire City aesthetically pleasing and encouraged staff to enforce and uphold the same standards and requirements consistently for all commercial and residential owners. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Board Members Rooker/Gray recommending to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 2014-1006 as submitted with staffs recommendations and the addition of the following conditions of approval: • Install 36-inch box Palos Verde trees • Add a minimum of two Washingtonia Robusta palm trees at the vehicular driveway entrance on Auto Centre Drive • Sidewalk installation along the perimeter of the entire site Motion passed unanimously. 2. Site Development Permit 2015-0005 submitted by Chandi Group, USA, proposing the construction of a 52,000 square -foot commercial development, which consists of a 6,000 square -foot gas station with convenience store/deli and 4,000 square -foot car wash facility, two 3,000 square -foot drive -through restaurant pads, and two 18,000 square -foot office/retail buildings. Project: Washington 50. Location: southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50. Principal Planner Wally Nesbit presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Discussion followed regarding Pedestrian courtyard area; number of trash receptacles; restaurant pads; pipe diameter; wall; tree sizes along back of project as well as along the front street perimeter of the project; landscape palette; power lines, storm water retention; hydrology requirements to ensure street ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING SPECIAL MEETING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES 2 DECEMBER 16, 2015 drainage into the channel; building elevations and material used; and community outreach by the applicant. Public Speaker: Ms. Gabriela Marks, Architect with Marks Architects, Inc., Rancho Mirage, CA - introduced herself, gave a detailed presentation of the proposed project, and answered the Board's questions regarding the proposed stucco and wood architectural design features, emergency exits, sidewalk, wall height, lighting requirements, size and location of waste receptacles. She said the color palette creates depth and ensures the project blends in with the surrounding residential developments. Public Speaker: Mr. Dennis Lubas, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and favors a wall placed at the backside of the project and discussed the materials to be used; shared his concerns regarding potential congestion in parking lot when service vehicles are making deliveries; trash enclosures and size; and concerns regarding community notification. Public Speaker: Mr. Dennis LoPresti, President of Duna La Quinta Homeowners Association, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and stated that he represents over 200 homeowners from the Duna La Quinta residential development located at the southwest corner of Avenue 50 and Washington Street. He shared concerns regarding flooding; poor city planning; added traffic and its impact on the students who walk to and from nearby schools; and lighting intrusion. He is opposed to the rezoning and will take legal action if necessary. Public Speaker: Mr. Henry Casden, Palmilla resident, La Quinta, CA - introduced himself and stated he is extremely opposed to the proposed project. His concerns included lack of notification to the community regarding the proposed project; increased traffic, noise and lighting issues; potential odors and exhaust from proposed restaurants and vehicles; impact on existing restaurants and gas stations in the Cove as well as the impact upon the developments of Palmilla, Painted Cove, Rancho La Quinta and the Estancias where multi -million -dollar homes are located. Mr. Casden questioned the use of wood in the architectural design elements and the challenge of maintaining the wood and stated that the back perimeter wall should not be painted or textured with stucco, but should be split -faced block with multi -colored designs or natural -looking colors. He shared his concerns regarding the potential for lack of tenants as seen in existing shopping centers such as the one located along Calle Tampico due to the economic downturn and stated that once you leave the commercial area along Highway 111 anything that you do is a problem due to the potential for a lack of economic vitality. Board Member McCune offered clarification as to the Architectural and Landscaping Review Board's scope of purview and its limitations and appreciates ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING SPECIAL MEETING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES 3 DECEMBER 16, 2015 the public's comments and also offered that the City's website offers quail mail notifications of all public meetings. Public Speaker: Mr. Michael Elliott, La Quinta resident - introduced himself and said the notification boundaries should be extended beyond the 500 foot requirement. Public Speaker: Mr. Dennis Lubas, La Quinta, CA - Mr. Lubas shared his concerns regarding the site plan and traffic flow as related to the proposed project. Public Speaker: Ms. Jane Johnson, La Quinta resident - introduced herself and said she understood the Architectural and Landscaping Review Board's scope of purview is with regards to design review of architecture and landscaping only. She asked for an explanation as to the process as this proposed project moves forward. Planning Manager Perez explained that the Architectural and Landscaping Review Board is an advisory board to the Planning Commission. The Board's recommendations are presented to the Planning Commission for review and consideration which is expected to be at the earliest sometime in February 2016. He explained there are still some outstanding items such as the results of tribal consultations, CVWD hydrology study, Public Works Department's comments, and 20-day public notification for the environmental review. Planning Manager Perez stated that the Initial Study for this project is underway and once it is completed it will be made available to the public review. Required notifications will be sent out to surrounding neighborhood, nearby homeowners associations and to anyonee who has submitted comments. Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Board Members McCune/Rooker recommending to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 2015-0005 as submitted with staffs recommendations and the addition of the following condition of approval: • Extend the recommended block wall for entire length of the project frontage along the CVWD channel (south and east); • Provide for additional trash enclosure/capacity as necessary; • Replace 24-inch box trees with 48-inch box trees and Date Palms should be a minimum brown trunk height of 18 feet. • Wooden architectural elements (trim, trellises, fascia, etc.) to be replaced with a suitable, more durable material; and • Final landscaping plan to address screening of potential lighting impacts and the entire wall along the channel. Motion passed unanimously. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING SPECIAL MEETING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES 4 DECEMBER 16, 2015 CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL - None 1. Planning Manager Perez announced the Development Code Tune Up Stakeholders community outreach meeting is scheduled to be held on December 16, at 4:00 p.m. at City Hall and encouraged the Board Members' attendance. The City Council and Planning Commission will hold a Joint Study Session to discuss the Ad -hoc Committee's final recommendations on proposed changes to Titles 8, 9, and 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code related to the development review process on February 12, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. in the Study Session Room and Board Members are invited to attend. 2. Planning Manager Perez provided an update on the status of the Saxony Convention Center project. 3. Staff announced that the City Council is moving forward with implementing electronic agenda packets and doing away with the traditional paper packets and delivery. Staff would like to do the same with the Architectural and Landscaping Review Board packets. BOARD MEMBER ITEMS - None ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, a motion was made and seconded by Board Members Gray/McCune to adjourn this meeting at 12:12 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Respectfully submitted, V*01 / MONIKA RADEVA, Executive Assistant City of La Quinta, California ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING SPECIAL MEETING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES 5 DECEMBER 16, 2015 ATTACHMENT 8 ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 2016 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the La Quinta Architectural and Landscaping Review Board was called to order at 10:06 a.m. by Principal Planner Jay Wuu. PRESENT: Board Members Kevin McCune and Ray Rooker ABSENT: Board Member Richard Gray STAFF PRESENT: Design and Development Director/City Engineer Tim Jonasson, Planning Manager Gabriel Perez, Principal Planner Jay Wuu, and Executive Assistant Wanda Wise -Latta. Board Member McCune led the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENT - None CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA - Confirmed APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Board Members McCune/Rooker to approve the Architectural and Landscaping Review Board Meeting Minutes of February 17, 2016 and the Architectural and Landscaping Review Board Meeting Minutes of March 2, 2016, as submitted. AYES: Board Members McCune and Rooker. NOES: None. ABSENT: Board Member Gray. ABSTAIN: None. Motion passed. BUSINESS SESSION 1. Site Development Permit 2016-0001 submitted by R & R Development Company LLC proposing to construct a 37,776 square -foot health and fitness facility with an outdoor aquatics area. Location: southwest corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive. Planning Manager Gabriel Perez presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Design and Development Department. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES 1 APRIL 6, 2016 The project site consists of approximately 5.7 acres within the Jefferson Square shopping center consisting of 10.79 acres. The proposed fitness center site was formerly approved for a 42,500 square -foot retail hardware store within the Jefferson Square Specific Plan. Public Speaker: Brendan Kelly, Fairfield, CA - introduced himself appearing on behalf of the applicant. Discussion followed regarding the outdoor workout space, indoor pool, proposed landscape and proposed building color palette. Board recommended placing several tall vertical trees and fan palms or Washingtonia Robusta palm trees against the building to soften the visual impact Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Board Members Rooker/McCune recommending to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 2016-0001 proposing to construct a 37,776 square -foot health and fitness facility with an outdoor aquatics area with the addition of Washingtonia Robusta Palm Trees planted in the landscape area along the east building elevation. Location: southwest corner of Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive. AYES: Board Members McCune and Rooker. NOES: None. ABSENT: Board Member Gray. ABSTAIN: None. Motion passed. 2. Site Development Permit 2015-0005 submitted by Chandi Group, USA, proposing the construction of a 52,000 square -foot commercial development, which consists of a 6,000 square -foot gas station with convenience store/deli and 4,000 square -foot car wash facility, two 3,000 square -foot drive -through restaurant pads, and two 18,000 square -foot office/retail buildings. Project: Washington 50. Location: southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50. Planning Manager Gabriel Perez presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Design and Development Department. Board discussion followed regarding the carwash; canopy over gasoline pumps; the change of one drive-thru restaurant to a sit-down restaurant; distance between Project property line and nearest home; and site elevation of Paloma project. Ms. Gabriela Marks, Architect with Marks Architects Inc., Rancho Mirage, CA - Ms. Marks introduced herself and answered the board's questions. Mr. Bill Sanchez, representing Chandi Group, Indio, CA - Mr. Sanchez introduced himself and answered the board's questions. Mr. Daniel Marks, Architect with Marks Architects Inc., Rancho Mirage, CA - Mr. Marks introduced himself. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES 2 APRIL 6, 2016 Public Speaker: The following speakers made general inquiries regarding the project: Jane Johnson, La Quinta - modification of plans Michael Linck, La Quinta - flood control Walt Sorenson, La Quinta - noise levels and timeline of project William Bresnahan, La Quinta - flood control, traffic Jim Tofu, La Quinta - project approval process Sandra Davis, La Quinta - (opposed) building height, security, flood control and traffic Mike Elliott, La Quinta - hydrology Stone James, Palm Desert - building height Motion - A motion was made and seconded by Board Members McCune/Rooker recommending to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 2015-0005 as submitted with staffs recommendations. AYES: Board Members McCune and Rooker. NOES: None. ABSENT: Board Member Gray. ABSTAIN: None. Motion passed. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL - None REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS - NONE BOARD MEMBER ITEMS - NONE ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, a motion was made and seconded by Board Members McCune/Rooker to adjourn this meeting at 11:20 a.m. AYES: Board Members McCune and Rooker. NOES: None. ABSENT: Board Member Gray. ABSTAIN: None. Respectfully submitted, WANDA WISE-LATTA, Executive Assistant City of La Quinta, California ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW BOARD MINUTES 3 APRIL 6, 2016 ATTACHMENT 9 CITY OF LA QUINTA 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Phone: (760) 777-7000 ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY Project Title: Washington/50 Case No: General Plan Amendment 2015-0001, Zone Change 2015-0002, Site Development Permit 2015-0005, CUP 2015-0002, Tentative Parcel Map 30007/TPM 2015-0007 Lead Agency City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 (760) 777-7125 Applicant: Chandi Group USA 42270 Spectrum Street Indio, CA, 92203 (760) 396 9260 Contact Person: Gabriel Perez, Planning Manager, City of La Quinta (760) 777-7125 Project Location: SE Corner of Washington and Avenue 50 La Quinta, CA 92253 APN: 770-040-012 General Plan/Zoning: Current: Medium/High Density Residential / Medium Density Residential Proposed: General Commercial / Community Commercial Surrounding Land Uses: North: Avenue 50, Vacant lands Medium/High Density Residential South: Flood Plain/Open Space, Medium Density Residential East: Flood Plain/Medium Density Residential West: Washington Street, Medium Density Residential Project Description: The proposed project is a commercial development comprised of a 6,000 square foot convenience store with in-store deli and a gas station with 20 pumps (10 pump stations with 2 dispensing nozzles each station), a 4,000 square foot automated car wash building, a 2,300 square foot fast food restaurant with drive -through service, a 3,700 square foot restaurant, and two 18,000 square Washington/50 IS foot buildings for retail and office use. The subject property is located on 7.63 acres of undeveloped land on the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50 in the City of La Quinta, California. Washington Street and Avenue 50 will provide access to the proposed project. A General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zone Change (ZC) are proposed to change the land use and zoning designations from the existing "Medium Density Residential" to "Community Commercial" to support the proposed commercial uses. A Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) is proposed to subdivide the lot and create 4 separate lots. Parcel 1 would consist of the convenience store/gas station with 20 pumps and the car wash building. The two 2-story retail/office buildings would be located on Parcel 2. Parcel 3 would hold the fast food restaurant with drive -through service. The second restaurant would be on Parcel 4. The Site Development Permit will consider the architecture and landscaping for the project site, and the Conditional Use Permit is necessary to allow the gas station/car wash/convenience store/drive through components of the project. The majority of the subject property is currently vacant with the exception of native vegetation re- growth interspersed with open areas of fine sand and silt. Project Location and Limits: The proposed project is located at the southeast corner of Avenue 50 and Washington Street in the City of La Quinta, California. The project consists of Assessor's Parcel 770-040-012. Other Required Public Agencies Approval: None -2- Washington/50 IS Exhibit 1 Regional Location Map 9I TO, I 2.— -3- P . —.— —gel 9AiA(] AjDAAC)qUq vq t 4 JiL If Washington/50 IS y4 pYN I it- 1 Exhibit 3 Site Plan 1 \ ARWASH .pM*F WjQA .. ' r a ki II + FY—1 —t — 1— 17I 7 89 J 9TUTo r y Od r� r, L I -5- Washington/50 IS ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils Greenhouse Gas Hazards & Hazardous Hydrology /Water Quality ❑ Emissions El Materials ❑ ❑ Land Use / Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities / Service Mandatory Findings of ❑ ❑ Systems ❑ Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, X there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable 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, nothing further is required. Signature Date -6- Washington/50 IS EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. -7- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: X a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, X trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and X its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely X affect day or nighttime views in the area? Source: 2035 General Plan, La Quinta Municipal Code, California Scenic Highway Mapping System, project materials. I. a) Less than Significant. The upper elevations of the rocky foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains are visible to the west and southwest of the project site, approximately 1 mile west of the proposed project area. Nonetheless, lower elevations are blocked by existing residential developments, and the quality of scenic vistas from the subject property is diminished. The proposed development will deviate from the existing residential development. The distance between the proposed buildings and residential development is approximately 450 feet, which will continue to allow views from the residences to the west, and result in a less than significant impact on scenic vistas. New landscape will be restricted to an approved plant palette consistent with the surrounding desert environment. As such, impacts to scenic vistas are expected to be less than significant. b) Less than Significant. The site is not located near an existing or proposed state scenic highway or historical buildings. However, both Washington Street and Avenue 50 are designated as Image Corridors in the 2035 General Plan and provide valuable visual character and resources to the City. Properties in the proposed project's vicinity generally enjoy views of the Santa Rosa Mountains located to the west and southwest. The proposed development will consist of convenience store/gas station with 20 pumps with a car wash building at the corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50th. The two fast food restaurants would be along Washington Street. Both of these developments would have single story buildings with heights not exceeding 19 feet from the top of the parapet, with tower features extending to 26'6" on the corners and a central tower feature of 32' in the center of the convenience store building. Tower elements on the fast food restaurants also extend to 26'6". The two 2-story retail/office buildings would be located on the southeastern portion of the subject site. These buildings extend to a height of 30'6", with tower elements reaching 40' in height. The closest -8- Washington/50 IS residences are approximately 450 from the proposed buildings. The proposed building coverage of the area will be approximately 17% of the total lot square footage. Given the distance and low intensity of the project, it is anticipated that the impact to the views of the Santa Rosa Mountains will be less than significant. c) Less than Significant. The subject site is currently vacant with sparse vegetation growth and provides little to no visual quality to its surroundings. The proposed height of the two 2-story buildings will be approximately 40 feet from the top of the tower elements and 30 feet from the top of the parapet. These buildings will be located on the southeasterly portion of the area. This proposed height should pose less than significant impacts on visual character for the surrounding residential properties insofar as the nearest residence property is located approximately 450 feet from the proposed buildings, and the finishes and architectural treatment of the buildings is compatible with development in the area. There is a potential for view obstruction to the Fairway residences located east of the project site, across the Coachella Valley Water District Channel. Even so, from that vantage point the views of the Santa Rosa Mountains will be minimally obstructed, resulting in a less than significant impact. d) Less than Significant. The proposed project will be required to abide by the City of La Quinta building codes and lighting ordinances, which require proper shielding of light sources and prohibit light spillage on adjacent properties. Prior to development a lighting plan will be submitted, approved, and all standard requirements will be applied. Lighting impacts related to the proposed project will be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None Monitoring: None U Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IL AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland X Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act X contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of X Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Source: "2035 General Plan", "California Department of Conservation, published January 2012", and "California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping, project materials". II. a) No Impact. The proposed project site is located in an urban area and is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance according to the California Dept. of Conservation, nor is it used for agricultural purposes. Therefore, the proposed development will not convert any agricultural area to non-agricultural use. No impact is expected. b) No Impact. The project site is not located on land designated as agricultural land or Williamson Act contract land. Therefore, the development will not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. No impact is expected. c) No Impact. As mentioned earlier (II-b), the subject property is not located on agricultural land; therefore, the development will not involve any change in the existing environment to result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use. No impact is expected. Mitigation Measures: None Monitoring: None -10- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air X quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or X 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 X state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? Source: La Quinta General Plan, SCAQMD CEQA Handbook; 2003 PM10 Plan for the Coachella Valley, SCAQMD 2012 Air Quality Management Plan; CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2; project materials. III. a) Less than Significant Impact. The Coachella Valley, including the project area, is located within the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). SCAQMD is responsible for monitoring criteria air pollutant concentrations and establishing management policies for the SSAB. All development within the SSAB is subject to SCAQMD's 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (2012 AQMP) and the 2003 Coachella Valley PMIO State Implementation Plan (2003 CV PMI0 SIP). The project will be developed in accordance with all applicable air quality management plans. The AQMP is based, in part, on the land use plans of the jurisdictions in the region. The project is proposing a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zone Change (ZC) to allow for commercial development in an area designated for medium -density residential. The change in -11- Washington/50 IS land use will result in a marginal regional increase in vehicle trips and associated emissions. This increase will not significantly impact the implementation of the AQMP and other plans, insofar as the proposed project will not generate air emissions beyond SCAQMD thresholds (please see III-b.). The change in land use proposed by the project is therefore expected to result in less than significant impacts to air quality management planning. b) Less than Significant. Criteria air pollutants will be released during both the construction and operational phases of the proposed project. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) Version 2013.2.2 was used to project air quality emissions that will be generated by the project. Table 1 summarizes short-term construction -related emissions, and Table 2 summarizes ongoing emissions generated at operation. Construction Emissions The construction period includes all aspects of project development, including site preparation, grading, hauling, paving, building construction, and application of architectural coatings. For analysis purposes, it is assumed that construction will occur over a 1-year period from mid 2016 to mid 2017. As shown in Table 1, emissions generated by construction activities will be less than significant levels. The data reflect average daily emissions over the 1-year construction period, including summer and winter weather conditions. The analysis assumes approximately 83,300 cubic yards of material will be imported during grading. Applicable minimization measures and best management practices include, but are not limited to, the implementation of dust control practices in conformance with SCQAMD Rule 403, proper maintenance and limited idling of heavy equipment, phasing application of architectural coatings and the use of low -polluting architectural paint and coatings. Adherence to such measures will ensure construction related emissions would remain less than significant. The complete list of minimization measures is provided at the end of this Section under Minimization Measures III (b). Table 1 Washington 50 Maximum Daily Construction -Related Emissions Summary (pounds per day) Construction Emissions' CO NOx ROG SOZ PMI0 PM2.5 2016 85.97 92.52 8.16 0.19 21.15 12.67 2017 30.67 30.11 23.88 0.04 3.07 2.06 SCAQMD Thresholds 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Exceeds? No No No No No No Average of winter and summer emissions, unmitigated, 2015-2016. Source: CaIEEMod model, version 2013.2.2 output tables generated 11.5.15. Operational Emissions Operational emissions are ongoing emissions that will occur over the life of the project. They include area source emissions, emissions from energy demand (electric and natural gas), and mobile source (vehicle) emissions. Traffic generation trip rates were derived from the project specific Traffic Report. Table 2 provides a summary of projected emissions at operation of the proposed project. -12- Washington/50 IS Table 2 Washington 50 Operation -Related Emissions Summary (pounds per day) CO NO7, ROG S02 PMIo PM2.5 Operational Emissions 332.16 55.29 49.09 0.24 14.37 4.23 SCAQMD Thresholds 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Exceeds? No No No No No No Average of winter and summer emissions, unmitigated, 2017. Source: CaIEEMod model, version 2013.2.2 output tables generated 11.5.15. As shown in Table 2, operational emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance for any criteria pollutants. The data are conservative and reflect unmitigated operations. c) Less than Significant. Historically, the Coachella Valley, in which the project site is located, has been classified as a "non -attainment" area for PM 10 and ozone. In order to achieve attainment in the region, the 2003 Coachella Valley PMIo Management Plan was adopted, which established strict standards for dust management for development proposals. The Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) is currently (November 2015) a non- attainment area for PMIo and is classified as attainment/unclassifiable for PM2.5. The proposed project will contribute to an incremental increase in regional ozone and PMIo emissions. However, given its limited size and scope, cumulative impacts are not expected to be considerable. Project construction and operation emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for PMIo or ozone precursors (NOx). The project will not conflict with any attainment plans and will result in less than significant impacts. d) Less than Significant. The nearest sensitive receptors are single-family residences immediately west of Washington Street, and to the east of the project site. Their distance from the building pad ranges from approximately 50-55 meters. To determine if the proposed project has the potential to generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts, the mass rate Localized Significance Threshold (LST) Look -Up Table was used. The City of La Quinta and subject property are located within Source Receptor Area 30 (Coachella Valley). Given the project's size and proximity to existing housing, the 5-acre site tables at a distance of 50 meters were used. Table 3 shows on -site emission concentrations for project construction and the associated LST. As shown in the table below, LSTs will not be exceeded under unmitigated conditions for CO and NOx. PMIo and PM2.5 show emissions under best management practices and standard dust control measures (SCAQMD Rule 403). Therefore, air quality impacts to nearby sensitive receptors during construction will be less than significant. -13- Washington/50 IS Table 3 Washington 50 Localized Significance Thresholds (lbs/day) CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 Construction 85.97 92.52 13.27 8.68 LST Threshold 3,237 340 44 11 Exceed? No No No No Emission Source: CaIEEMod model, version 2013.2.2 output tables generated 11.5.15 LST Threshold Source: LST Mass Rate Look -up Table, SCAQMD. e) Less than Significant. The proposed project is not expected to generate objectionable odors during any of the phases of construction or at project buildout. The proposed project has the potential to result in short term odors associated with paving and other construction activities. However any such odors would be quickly dispersed below detectable thresholds as distance from the construction site increases. Therefore, impacts from objectionable odors are expected to be less than significant. -14- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local X or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional X plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) 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, X vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with X established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, X such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or X other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Source: 2035 General Plan, Coachella Valley MSHCP, project materials. -15- Washington/50 IS IV. a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. According to the "Biological Resources Assessment Technical Report" for the Washington 50 Project, the subject area contains no special status and priority plants or animals. The approximately 8 acres of the site is highly disturbed and contains none of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) covered sensitive plants or animals. In addition, no federal or state botanical or zoological endangered or threatened species were found within the approximately 8 acre project site areas or 250-foot buffer survey zone. Therefore, no impact is expected, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The assessment found that ruderal vegetation found on site was 50% saltcedar, 25% mesquite thickets and 25% various native plants. Saltcedar (Tamarix spp) is a deciduous tree (or shrub) with long slender branches and deep pink flowers. Saltcedar when present in any area, do not allow other communities to grow, and are also a great consumer of water. Therefore, presence of saltcedar is a threat to the onsite ecosystem and water. As a result, the removal of saltcedar is required before construction, and must be undertaken in a manner that limits the potential for the species to spread to other areas. Although there was no sign of presence of burrowing owl onsite, they are present in the region. There are trees onsite (excluding saltcedar and mesquite) that could encourage bird nesting. The proposed site is covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and nesting birds must be protected during the nesting season. The MBTA is a federal statute to protect species that migrate between countries. In order to comply with the MBTA, any vegetation or tree removal, or other ground disturbing activities occurring between January 1st and August 31 st shall require a qualified biologist to conduct a nesting bird survey to determine if there is a potential impact to such species. With the implementation of mitigation measures for saltcedar and nesting birds, impacts associated with special status species will be reduced to less than significant levels. b-c) No Impact. There are no riparian habitats or wetlands located on the site; therefore, no impact is expected on riparian species or habitat, wetlands or other sensitive natural communities, including marshes or vernal pools, or through direct removal, filling, or hydrological interruption of a natural drainage. d) No Impact. The subject property is in a predominantly ruderal vegetative community surrounded by housing developments. The project site is surrounded by Washington Street to the west and Avenue 50 to the north. Residential areas and a vacant lot are found to the north, west and east and surround the site, isolating it from native habitat and the potential for a wildlife corridor. Therefore, the project will not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. e,f) Less than Significant. Based on the "Biological Resources Assessment Technical Report", the proposed development will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance nor does it conflict with the provisions of the MSHCP, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. However, the proposed project is located in -16- Washington/50 IS the City of La Quinta, which has adopted the MSHCP. As a result, the City is required to implement a Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF) for projects located within the CVMSHCP plan area. Although the proposed project site is not within a designated conservation area, as defined in the Plan, it is located with the general Plan boundaries, and the developer will be required to pay LDMF. These fees are designed to offset potential impacts of cumulative projects on covered biological species, and assure that impacts are reduced throughout the Valley and City to less than significant levels. Mitigation Measures 1. Survey for nestingbirds: To comply with the MBTA, any vegetation or tree removal, or other ground disturbing activities occurring between January 1 st and August 31 st shall require a qualified biologist to conduct a nesting bird survey to determine if there is a potential impact to such species. All vegetation and suitable nesting habitat (including open ground) on the project site, whether or not it will be removed or disturbed, shall be surveyed for nesting birds within 30 days of the initiation of ground disturbing activity. If active nests of any native bird are found on site, they will be avoided until after the young have fledged. If no nests are present, this condition will be cleared. Conducting construction activities outside the breeding season (September 1 st through December 31 st) will avoid having to implement these measures. 2. Use of covered trailers to remove saltcedars: Saltcedars should be removed with the use of covered trailers to avoid the distribution of plant seeds or plant material. Monitoring A. The City's Planning Division shall assure that necessary nesting bird surveys are completed in compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and applicable protocol. Responsible Parties: Planning Division Schedule: Between January 1st to August 315Y and no more than 30 days prior to site disturbance. -17- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than Significant Significant w/ Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as X defined in ' 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological X resource pursuant to ' 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique X geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal X cemeteries? Source: 2035 General Plan, County of Riverside General Plan (2014), "Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Washington 50 7.48 Acre Project" prepared by Tierra Environmental Services, Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) prepared by the San Diego Natural History Museum, project materials. V. a-b) No Impact. A cultural resources survey was conducted by Tierra Environmental Services to identify any potentially significant historical or archaeological resources within the proposed project area that would be subjected to adverse effect due to the proposed development. The survey concluded that there are no known historic or archaeological resources of significance located on the site. The site is situated in an area surrounded by residential developments. It is bounded by Washington Street (an Urban Arterial roadway) on the west and Avenue 50 on the north. The 2035 General Plan details that the northwestern portion of the subject site has been previously surveyed for cultural resources (General Plan Exhibit III-4). The report stated that due to the area's highly disturbed nature from previous urban development, it is not anticipated that the proposed project will adversely affect historical or archaeological resources. For this reason, the proposed project is not likely to cause an impact to any significant historical or archaeological resource in the subject area. c) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The proposed project is in an area of the City of high paleontological sensitivity/significance, underlain by ancient Lake Cahuilla (General Plan Exhibit III-5). The San Diego Natural History Museum prepared a report for the project area to address this concern and concluded that the area is mapped as "High Sensitivity A" in the paleontological sensitivity database of the County of Riverside General Plan update. Nonetheless, the report indicated that this ranking may be inaccurate and that the project area would be more appropriately considered a "High Sensitivity B" paleontological sensitivity area since the surficial sediments are not likely to contain fossils, but paleontologically sensitive strata may be found at depths greater than 4 feet. -18- Washington/50 IS Since the proposed project will include a gas station with sub -terrain storage it is recommended that a qualified paleontologist be present at a pre -construction meeting and make the determination of the need for paleontological monitoring. With the incorporation of these recommendations the construction of the proposed project will result in less than significant impacts on paleontological resources. d) No Impact. During construction of the proposed project it is not anticipated that any human remains will be encountered because the site and surrounding areas have been previously disturbed to accommodate development. In the event any previously unidentified or unanticipated human remains are discovered during project construction, state law requires that local law enforcement be contacted and the remains be removed in a prescribed manner. Mitigation Measures I. A qualified paleontologist shall monitor site -disturbing activities, particularly at depths of 4 feet or more. The paleontologist shall be empowered to stop and/or redirect construction activities if a resource is uncovered; investigate the resource; curate the resource if necessary; and direct when construction activities can resume at and around the resource. Monitoring A. The paleontological monitor shall provide the City with a written report of findings during monitoring facilities within 30 days of the completion of monitoring on the site. Responsible Parties: Monitor, Planning Division Schedule: Within 30 days of the completion of monitoring activities. -19- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map X issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the X loss of topsoil? c) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform X Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? d) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems X where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Sources: 2035 General Plan; project materials. VI. a) i. No Impact. The proposed project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (General Plan Exhibit IV-2), and there are no known active or potentially active faults on site or within the immediate vicinity. There will be no impacts associated with fault rupture on the project site. ii. Less than Significant. The proposed site is located in a seismically active area based upon proximity to four regionally significant faults: the San Andreas, San Jacinto-Anza segment, San -Jacinto -Coyote Creek segment, and Burnt Mountain segment. The San Andreas Fault is capable of generating a magnitude 7.4 quake. All structures in the proposed project area will be subjected to ground shaking, and have the potential to be seriously damaged if not properly designed. All construction on the site will be required to abide by the standards and -20- Washington/50 IS requirements of the Uniform Building Code for Seismic Zone 4, thus reducing the impacts related to strong ground shaking to less than significant levels. iii. Less than Significant. Exhibit IV-3 of the 2035 General Plan indicates the project site is located in an area of low liquefaction susceptibility. Fine-grained granular sediments that are normally susceptible to liquefaction characterize this area, but groundwater depths are greater than 50 feet. The project is required to conform with the City Zoning, Development Code and the Uniform Building Code Standards at the time of construction, thus further reducing impacts related to seismically induced liquefaction to less than significant levels. iv. No Impact. The proposed project site is relatively flat with a gradual slope that trends southeast. The site is not located within the vicinity of a landform susceptible to landslides, such as a slope or hillside. The Santa Rosa Mountains are located approximately 1 mile from the proposed project area; it is unlikely that a landslide will adverse affect the proposed project. Under existing conditions, the site consists of a vacant lot having a relatively flat topography. Surface drainage is in a general direction of north to south to the low point in the southeast corner. No impacts are expected. b) Less than Significant. The project site is located within a high to very high Wind Erosion Hazard zone as identified in the 2035 General Plan, Exhibit IV-5. The project area is susceptible to high winds that can cause wind erosion and soil displacement and accumulation. The applicant will be required to submit a dust control and management plan as part of the permitting process (please see Air Quality section, above). During grading operations the project has the potential to cause airborne and waterborne erosion. Standard City protocols would be enforced during review of engineering design plans. Implementation of dust control management practices and City requirements for surface water management will reduce impacts associated with soil erosion and loss of topsoil to less than significant levels. c) Less than Significant. Soils in the planning area include alluvial sand and gravel with fine- grained lakebed deposits such as silts and clays in some areas. The project site is located on lands comprised of wind -laid dune sand (Qs) as shown in Exhibit IV-4 of the General Plan. Theses soil types are not expansive. For that reason, the proposed project will not be located on expansive soil and will not create substantial risks to life or property. No impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed development. d) No Impact. The proposed project occurs in an urbanized area of the City. The proposed project will be required to connect to sanitary sewer lines in the area, and no septic systems will be permitted. No impact is expected. Mitigation: None required. Monitoring: None required. -21- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Significant Significant Significant Impact -- Would the project: Impact w/ Impact Mitigation a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have X a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of X reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Source: CaIEEMod Version 2013.2.2, project materials. VII.a,b)Less than Significant. The proposed project will generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during both construction and operation. As mentioned in Section III (Air Quality), CalEEMod was used to quantify air quality emission projections, including greenhouse gas emissions. Construction related greenhouse gas emissions will be temporary and will end once the project is completed. Operation of the proposed project will create on -going greenhouse gases through the consumption of electricity and natural gas, moving sources, the transport and pumping of water for onsite use, and the disposal of solid waste. Table 4 provides projected short-term and annual GHG generation for the proposed project Table 4 Washington 50 GHG Emissions from Construction and Operation (Metric Tons/Year) CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Construction Activities 665.35 0.07 0.00 666.88 Operational Activities 3,219.44 1.47 0.01 3,253.65 CalEEMod model, version 2013.2.2 output tables generated 11.12.14. Values shown represent the total annual, unmitigated GHG emission projections for construction and operation of the proposed project, 2017. State legislation, including A1332, aims for the reduction of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2020; however, there are currently no thresholds for greenhouse gases associated with commercial developments in the SCAQMD. It is recognized that GHG impacts are intrinsically cumulative. Project construction and operation will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with applicable rules and regulations pertaining to the release and generation of GHG's. Statewide programs and standards will further reduce GHG emissions generated by the project, including new fuel -efficient standards for cars, and newly adopted Building Code Title 24 standards. The proposed project will also be subject to the City's adopted Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan, which includes measures specific to new construction and the operation of new businesses. The Plan's provisions, and increasingly stringent standards for GHG emissions, will reduce the potential GHG emissions generated by the proposed project. -22- Washington/50 IS The proposed project will have a less than significant impact on the environment from the emission of GHG's and will not conflict with any applicable GHG plans, policies or regulations. Mitigation: None required. Monitoring: None required. -23- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine X 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 X involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, X substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section X 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport X or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety X hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response X plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are X adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Source: 2035 General Plan, CA Department of Toxic Substances, project materials. VII. a-b) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project involves the development of 6,000 square foot convenience store and a gas station with 20 pumps, a 4,800 square foot car wash building, 2,300 square foot fast food restaurant with drive -through service, 3,700 square foot restaurant, and two 18,000 square foot buildings for retail and office use that will generate new buildings or other improvements. -24- Washington/50 IS The gas station with 20 pumps can create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of fuel materials if not properly managed and monitored during operation. The operation of the gas station, however, will be highly regulated by local, regional and State agencies. The Riverside County Department of Environmental Health will regulate the use and storage of gasoline on the site, including the installation and operation of emergency shut off valves and the installation and maintenance of double -hulled storage tanks. The double -hulled storage tanks that will be required for the station are designed to mitigate any potential impact to the underground water table. The Highway Patrol and other State agencies regulate the transport of gasoline and similar materials, including the use of double -hulled tankers. The Fire Department will regulate the storage of materials, and conduct regular inspections. The proposed project will be required to comply with all local, regional and State laws. These standard requirements assure that potential impacts associated with the transport, storage or use of hazardous materials from the gas station will remain less than significant. c) Less than Significant Impact. The nearest schools to the proposed project are Harry S Truman Elementary School (0.4 miles) and John Adams Elementary School (I mile). The Harry S Truman Elementary School is located within a half mile of a subject property and emission and handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste can impact the existing school. However, as described above, the standard requirements and regulations to which the proposed gas station will be subject will assure that the impact will be less than significant. d) No Impact. The project site is not located on or near a hazardous materials site as identified by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. It will not create a significant hazard to the public or environment. e-f) No Impact. The project site is located approximately 6 miles south of the Bermuda Dunes airport. The project site is not susceptible to hazards associated with aviation. g) No Impact. The proposed project will not physically interfere with local or regional roadway networks, or interfere with implementation of an emergency response or evacuation plan. The proposed project will have access to the City's existing street grid for emergency purposes, including Washington Street and Avenue 50. No impacts are expected. h) No Impact. The project site is located on the valley floor, and is in a highly urbanized area. There will be no impacts associated with wildland fires. Mitigation measures: None. Monitoring: None. -25- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table X 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)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a X stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the X rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or X provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate X Map or other flood hazard delineation map? g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or X redirect flood flows? Source: 2035 General Plan; FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel #2233G; project materials; Hydrology Study for -26- Washington/50 IS Washington 50 prepared by Commercial Development Resources, 2016; Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Commercial Development Resources, 2015. IX. a) No Impact. The proposed project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements will be implemented for storm flows, insofar as the City will require that the applicant to prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The proposed developments will be connected to existing sewer lines in Washington Street and Avenue 50. The wastewater produced by the proposed project will be transported to and processed at the Coachella Valley Water District's (CVWD) Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4) in Thermal. These measures will prevent any violations to water quality or waste discharge requirements. Hence, no impacts are forestalled as a result of the proposed development. b) Less than Significant Impact. Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) will supply domestic water to the proposed project. CVWD has prepared an Urban Water Management Plan 2010 Update, which is a long-term document that facilitates the planning for current and future water demands. The UWMP demonstrates that the District has available, and can supply, sufficient water to serve the proposed project. The project site is designated for residential development, and would have been considered for such development in the UWMP. The change to commercial uses on the site will result in a lesser use of domestic water, even with the inclusion of the car wash facilities. The car wash is required to implement water recycling capabilities, and will therefore reuse much of the water demand it generates. The commercial and office components of the project will require less water than comparable square footage of residential space. hi the short term, water will be required during site grading. At buildout, water will be required to comply with CVWD's and the City's water -efficiency requirements, including the use of drought -tolerant planting materials and limited landscaping irrigation. Implementation of these and other applicable requirements will assure that ground water supplies and recharge impacts are reduced to less than significant levels. c-f) Less than Significant Impact. The commercial project will result in impermeable hardscape onsite, which will increase surface runoff and somewhat alter the local drainage pattern. The current site is vacant and is below the top of curb elevations along the intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 50. The project site will be raised as part of project development. An internal flood control system has been designed to capture 100 year storm flows and direct them to an underground infiltration system located in the northeast portion of the site. Storm flows in excess of the 100 year storm would be directed to a secondary discharge, directly into the Evacuation Channel. An external storm drain system will be constructed to convey the off -site street tributary area drainage. According to the Hydrology Study (Commercial Development Resources, 2016), the required storage capacity for the site is 84,560 cubic feet (100-year 24-hour runoff) and the total storage capacity of the underground percolation system is 85,948 cubic feet (100-year 24-hour run). The proposed project will be required to develop and implement a SWPPP and a WQMP, which specifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent all construction pollutants from remaining in storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving offsite into receiving waters. -27- Washington/50 IS The proposed project will be required to submit the stormwater drainage plan prior to construction to ensure impacts to local drainage are reduced to less than significant levels. All hydrology improvements will also be required to comply with NPDES standards, to assure that no polluted storm water enters other surface waters either during construction or operation of the project. The City's requirements assure that drainage patterns will not be significantly impacted by the proposed project nor will it substantially degrade water quality. g-i) Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is designated Zone X on FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, which is defined as an area of moderate to low risk of flood hazard. The site currently occurs below the grade of the surrounding streets, in a sump condition. The project proposes to raise the site from 6 to 8 feet, and as a result will locate buildings at least one foot above the 100 year flood plain. The proposed project will not place housing within the boundaries of the 100-year flood hazard area nor will it expose people or structure to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding. j) No Impact. A seiche is the oscillation of water in an enclosed body of water (for example a lake). The proposed project area is not located near an enclosed body of water. For this reason, no impact would occur. It is not likely that La Quinta will be affected by a tsunami because the City is located approximately 60 miles from the Pacific Coast. No impact would occur. Mudflow would be associated with a reservoir, which could break resulting in flooding or mudflow to down stream properties. No reservoirs are located in the vicinity of the proposed project. For this reason, no impact would occur. Mitigation: None required. Monitoring: None required. -28- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established X community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general X plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community X conservation plan? Sources: 2035 General Plan, 2003 CVMSHCP Figure 4-1: Conservation Areas; project materials. X. a) No Impact. The proposed project will not divide an established community. The site is currently vacant, and is situated on the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50 surrounded by residential developments. b) Less than Significant Impact. The site has been designated as Medium/ High Density Residential in the City's General Plan. The proposed project is for commercial land uses, and a General Plan Amendment to designate the site "General Commercial" will be necessary. The subject property's zoning designation is Medium Density Residential (RM) with an Affordable Housing Overlay; this is inconsistent with the proposed project. A Zone Change to Community Commercial is also required. This zone allows the proposed uses, with the exception of services stations, car washes, and convenience stores that will be opened for more than 18 hours a day. This proposed component requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application. The site is located at the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50, which border it on the west and north sides. On the east and south, the site is bordered by the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, and golf course and single family residential beyond. Lands to the north are vacant. Lands to the west, northwest and east are residential. Lands to the south are golf course and residential. The site is isolated by roadways and the Evacuation Channel. As a result, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change will be limited to the site, and will not intrude into residential land uses. The designation will allow the development of commercial and office uses in close proximity to residents, and could therefore reduce trips if neighborhood residents were to access the site on foot or by other non -motorized means. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, therefore, will have a less than significant impact on Land Use and Planning. -29- Washington/50 IS c) No Impact. The project site is not located within any conservation areas as identified in the CVMSHCP. However, the property is within the general boundaries of the Plan, and therefore, the project proponent will be required to pay the Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF). These fees are applied to new developments to mitigate the impacts on sensitive resources. Therefore, the proposed project will not impact the existing CVMSHCP. Mitigation: None required. Monitoring: None required. -30- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of X value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local X general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Sources: 2035 General Plan, project materials. XI.a,b) No Impact. Mineral resources in the City consist primarily of sand and gravel. The proposed project site is located in Mineral Resource Zone MRZ-1, which indicates that no resources occur (Exhibit III-1, 2035 General Plan). There will be no impact to mineral resources as a result of the proposed project. Mitigation: None required Monitoring: None required -31- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XII. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or X noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or X groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project X vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the X project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, X would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose X people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Source: 2035 General Plan Noise Element; Washington 50 Project Noise Impact Analysis; project materials. XII. a) Less than Significant Impact. The City of La Quinta Noise Element of the General Plan provides guidelines for community noise impacts per land use designation. The current Municipal Code noise standards for residential land uses allow noise levels of 60 dBA from lam to lOpm, and 50 dBA from lOpm to lam. The primary source of noise in the City and project area is traffic related. The main source of off -site exterior noise impacting the project area will be generated from traffic along Washington Street and Avenue 50. A Noise Impact Analysis was prepared for the proposed project. Table 7 of the Noise Impact Analysis provides exterior noise levels along main roadways prior to the proposed development, and shows that noise levels currently range from 76.9 to 77.5 dBA CNEL on Washington Street, and 68.6 dBA CNEL on Avenue 50 in the vicinity of the proposed project. Table 8 shows the exterior noise levels after build out of the proposed development, with noise levels ranging -32- Washington/50 IS from 77.1 to 77.7 dBA CNEL on Washington Street, and 69.3 dBA CNEL on Avenue 50 in the vicinity of the proposed project. As shown in Table 9 of the Noise Impact Analysis, the proposed project will result in an increase of 0.1 to 0.7 dBA on area roadways. In order to be audible, and therefore significant, an increase in noise must be at least 3 dBA. Therefore, the proposed project will not significantly impact the noise environment at or surrounding the project site. The proposed project is located in proximity to single-family detached residential dwelling units located to the west, south, and east of the project site that are sensitive receptors, based on La Quinta City standards. The City's Noise Element has shown that existing noise levels (without the proposed project) along Washington Street and Avenue 50 already exceed 65 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from the centerline. As a result, the residences in the project area already have noise attenuation barriers. Those noise attenuation barriers are designed to reduce noise levels by 10 to 15 dBA. The existence of these noise barriers will help in reducing potential impact from traffic noise due to the proposed development to less than significant levels. Kunzman Associates, Inc. modeled the future noise level along five roadways (Eisenhower Drive, Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Avenue 50, and 52). The calculations included stationary on -site sources such as parking lots, drive-thru menus, car wash equipment, and vacuums. All the stationary on -site sources were considered as one source in those calculations. During the construction phase, the unmitigated noise levels at 150 feet would reach 75 dBA Leq and 79 dBALma, at the nearest residential receptors. This may exceed the City's Municipal Code Section 6.08.050 for construction noise level; however, these noise levels will be temporary and periodic, as the construction noise depends upon construction process, type of equipment involved, location of the construction site with respect to sensitive receptors, the duration of the construction noise, and the schedule proposed to carry out each task (such as hours and days of the week). Construction on the project site will be limited to daytime hours, as prescribed in the City's Municipal Code. During the operational phase, sensitive receptors that may be affected by the project include the surrounding single-family detached residential units to the west, east, and south of the project site. An analysis of on -site noise generation, and its impacts on off -site receptors, was conducted based on the project site plan, and considering the car wash building, which will be the single greatest point source of noise on the site. Immediately surrounding the car wash, noise levels can be expected to range to 75 dBA. However, the 65 dBA noise contour will be contained entirely on site. The future unmitigated operational noise levels would reach 38.1 to 53.6 dBA at the nearest residential receptors. As the operational noise levels will be below the City's maximum standard, impacts will be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. The City requires that exterior noise levels not exceed 65 dBA CNEL in outdoor living areas, and interior noise levels not exceed 45 dBA CNEL in all habitable rooms for residential uses. Effective noise attenuation barriers can reduce noise levels by 10 to 15 dBA. Residential units located adjacent to the project site have existing noise attenuation barriers. Noise generated by project operation and related traffic is anticipated to be similar to existing noise for the surrounding residential uses and traffic along Washington Street and Avenue 50. Therefore, exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the general plan or noise ordinance will be less than significant after build out of the proposed development. -33- Washington/50 IS b) Less than Significant Impact. The source of groundborne vibration or groundborne noise for the proposed project is temporary and related to construction activities. Even then, the expected vibration that can be generated during construction will be less than 0.2+ inches per second (in/sec) PPV; therefore, there is a low potential to expose any persons to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. c) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The existing maximum ambient noise level in the project vicinity is 54.5 to 70.0 dBALg during the daytime, and the main existing source is vehicles along Washington Street and Avenue 50. Per the Noise Impact Analysis, future unmitigated operational noise levels are expected to range from 38.1 to 53.6 dBA. The City's daytime (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) 60 dBA standard will be maintained. The noise levels generated by the car wash, however, will not comply with the City's nighttime level of 50 dBA. The Noise Impact Analysis found that mitigation was required to assure that nighttime noise standards were not exceeded. Mitigation is proposed below that will limit operation of the car was to daytime hours (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) hours and not during nighttime hours (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). With implementation of this measure, there will not be a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels as a result of the proposed development, as described above. Impacts are expected to be less than significant with mitigation. d) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. For the proposed development, a temporary increase in noise is expected during the construction period. Site preparation is expected to produce a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels (more than 96DBA at 50ft; Table 5 of Noise Impact Analysis). As a result, noise reduction measures are recommended to reduce the temporary noise levels during the construction period. The implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce construction noise to less than significant levels. e,f) No Impact. The project site is located approximately 6 miles to the south of the Bermuda Dunes Airport. Although an occasional overflight is likely, the approach patterns do not occur in the vicinity of the proposed project. There are no private airstrips in the region. Therefore, there will be no impact associated with airport noise. Mitigation Measures 1. Use of Mufflers: During the site excavation and grading, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturer standards. 2. Re -direction of the noise: The contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment in such a direction that emitted noise is directed away from the noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site. 3. Proper shutdown of equipment when not in use: Equipment shall be properly shut off and not left to idle when not in use. 4. Choice of distant equipment stagingareas. reas. The contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction- related noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. -34- Washington/50 IS 5. Avoid sensitive receptors contact: All portable stationary noise sources including jackhammers and pneumatic equipment shall be shielded and noise shall be directed away from sensitive receptors. 6. Limit Operations of Car Wash: Operation of the car wash shall be limited to the hours of 7 AM to 10 PM. Monitoring A. The Building Department shall ensure that noise mitigation is implemented through the construction period by regular inspection of the construction site. Responsible Parties: Building Department Schedule: Throughout the construction of the project. -35- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) X or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of X replacement housing elsewhere? Source: 2035 General Plan Housing Element, project materials. XIII. a) No Impact. The proposed project will result in a commercial development that will not substantially increase the population in the area. The proposed development will be comprised of a 6,000 square foot convenience store and a gas station with 20 pumps, a 4,800 square foot car wash building, one 2,300 square foot fast food restaurant with drive -through service, a 3,700 square foot restaurant, and two 18,000 square foot buildings for retail and office use. This type of development is unlikely to draw new residents to the City and would most likely employ local residents. Therefore, the proposed project will result in no impacts to the area's population growth. b-c) No Impact. The proposed site is currently vacant. The proposed project will not result in the loss or relocation of housing stock. For this reason, construction of the proposed project will result in no impact. Mitigation: None required Monitoring: None required -36- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? X Police protection? X Schools? X Parks? X Other public facilities? X Source: 2035 General Plan, Google Earth accessed October 2015, project materials. XIV. a) Fire Protection- Less than Significant Impact. The City of La Quinta contracts with the County of Riverside Fire Department for fire protection services. The nearest fire stations to the project area include: Station No. 32 78111 Avenue 52 Station No. 70 54001 Madison Street Station No. 93 44555 Adams Street The nearest exiting fire station (Station #32) that would respond first to an incident is located approximately 1.5 miles north of the project site at 78111 Avenue 52. The other two fire stations are located at 78111 Avenue 52 (#70) and 54001 Madison Street (#93). All County - operated stations feature a minimum of one trained paramedic as part of their three -person engine company per RCFD policy. The Fire Department operates four additional stations in surrounding communities that are available for emergency response. The Department's first - in -response times range from two to six minutes, and it has an Insurance Services Office (ISO) public protection class rating of four (on a scale of 1 through 10, with 10 being the -37- Washington/50 IS highest) based on the provision of staffing, communication, water system for suppression, building standards, and other criteria. The proposed project involves the development of gas station that can be sensitive in regards to fire protection; however, it will be built and operated in accordance with all City Municipal Code and/or Riverside County Fire Protection Standards to assure adequate fire safety and emergency response. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant. Police Protection- Less than Significant Impact. The City of La Quinta contracts with the Riverside County Sheriffs Department for the provision of police protection services. The proposed project involves the development of 6,000 square foot convenience store and a gas station with 20 pumps, a 4,000 square foot car wash building, two 3,000 square foot fast food restaurants with drive -through service, and two 18,000 square foot buildings for retail and office use that will generate new buildings or other improvements. This can increase the demand for police protection but will not require the construction of new police facilities. Project plans will be reviewed by the Sheriffs Department, and development will occur in accordance with City standards to assure adequate police protection is provided. No significant project -related impacts are anticipated. Schools —No Impact The proposed project will result in general commercial / community commercial development and has no potential to directly increase student population or school building. The proposed project is located within the Desert Sands Unified School District and will be required to pay the State mandated developer fee to help address and offset the potential impacts to local schools. Fees will be collected prior to the issuance of building permits. No impact is expected. Parks — No Impact. The proposed commercial project it is not expected to substantially increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. However, the proposed project will participate in the City's parkland in -lieu fee program to offset impacts associated with parks generated by the project. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. Mitigation: None required Monitoring: None required -38- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that X substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which X might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Sources: 2035 General Plan, project materials. XV. a-b) No Impact. Residents of La Quinta currently have access to 72 acres of parks, 147 acres of nature preserves containing recreational parkland areas, 845 acres of regional parks, a 525- acre municipal golf course, and numerous other private and public recreational facilities. The General Plan sets a requirement for providing a minimum of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. When this standard is applied to the estimated General Plan buildout population, a total of 403 acres of neighborhood and community parks will be required to adequately serve the City and its sphere of influence. The proposed development comprised of a 6,000 square foot convenience store and a gas station with 20 pumps, a 4,800 square foot car wash building, a 2,300 square foot fast food restaurant with drive -through service, a 3,700 square foot restaurant, and two 18,000 square foot buildings for retail and office use. This project will not include any recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. It is not expected that development will substantially increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. Mitigation: None required Monitoring: None required -39- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial X increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion X management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in X traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or X dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle X racks)? Source: 2035 General Plan, " Washington 50 Project — Traffic Impact Analysis" prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc. Engineering Bulletin No. 06-13. Project materials. XVI. a-b) Less than Significant Impact. Kunzman Associates, Inc. prepared a Traffic Impact Report in August 2015 for the proposed project. The traffic impact report compares and analyzes impacts associated with the commercial development that is comprised of a 6,000 square foot convenience store and a gas station with 20 pumps, a 4,800 square foot car wash building, a 2,300 square foot fast food restaurant with drive -through service, a 3,700 square restaurant, and two 18,000 square foot buildings for retail and office use. The proposed development is projected to generate approximately 2,890 daily vehicle trips, 223 of which occur during the morning peak hour and 253 of which occur during the evening peak hour. The proposed project will have access to Washington Street and Avenue 50, and -40- Washington/50 IS will be required to build out the full half section of Avenue 50 with project implementation. According to the traffic impact report, the level of service will be unaffected with the proposed project. The main site access would provide adequate capacity to accommodate the site traffic generated by the proposed project, and do so at acceptable levels of service. The recommendations for internal circulation contained in the Traffic Impact Analysis will be implemented to assure safe traffic operations. Therefore, impacts related to roadway capacity and level of service are considered less than significant. c) No Impact. The nearest airport, Bermuda Dunes Airport, is located approximately 5 miles north of the proposed site. The project is not located within proximity to an airport and will not impact air traffic patterns. d) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project is required to meet the City's Development Code standards for roadway, parking and intersection designs, and is not expected to significantly impact traffic safety. Impacts will be less than significant. e) Less than Significant Impact. Access to the planning area is via major arterial, secondary arterials, Interstate-10 and a variety of local roads. East -west roadways include Highway I I I and Avenue 50, while Washington Street serves as both the north -south roadway and project access. Design guidelines further ensure that emergency access will be created and preserved for the proposed project. The proposed project will not result in inadequate emergency access. f) No Impact. The proposed project will provide the required amount of parking consistent with design guidelines for a commercial development. No impact is expected. g) No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. SunLine Transit currently operates service on Washington Street, in proximity of the proposed project. Mitigation Measures: None Monitoring: None -41- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional X Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or X are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has X adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the X project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid X waste? Source: Hydrology Study for Washington 50 prepared by Commercial Development Resources, 2016; Project materials. XVII. a) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located in the Colorado River Basin region of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, which administers the wastewater discharge requirements for the Coachella Valley. All development within the proposed property will be connected to existing sewer lines in either Avenue 50 or Washington Street. Project wastewater will be transported to and processed at CVWD's Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4) in Thermal. CVWD implements all the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board as they relate to wastewater discharge requirements -42- Washington/50 IS and water quality standards. The proposed project will result in an increase wastewater flows to the treatment plant, but the impact to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements will be less than significant, because of the implementation of mandated standards. b-e) Less Than Significant Impact. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides domestic water supplies and wastewater treatment to the City of La Quinta, and the proposed site. The subject property will be connected to existing water and sanitary sewer lines in either Avenue 50 or Washington Street, and no new regional infrastructure will be required. Wastewater produced by the proposed project will be processed at the Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4) located in Thermal. Stormwater will be discharged to the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) La Quinta Evacuation Channel. The proposed storm drain inlets and pipe systems and discharge would collect on -site storm drain runoffs into percolation system of above ground retention and infiltration and/or underground infiltration in series with underground storage and percolation. CVWD has prepared an Urban Water Management Plan 2010 Update, which is a long-term planning document that helps it plan for current and future water demands. The Plan demonstrates that the District has available, or can supply, sufficient water to serve the City and project area. The project will also be required to implement water conservation programs, including a drought tolerant landscaping plan and the CalGreen Building Code, which requires that high efficiency fixtures be used. The project area is currently designated, as Medium/High Density Residential/Medium Density Residential and it will be developed as a General Commercial area. This will reduce the future water demand projections; the impact will be less than significant. CVWD is also responsible for regional stormwater management in the Coachella Valley where the general project area is adequately protected from stormwater flows by the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (Whitewater River), and drainage issues affecting the subject property are limited to the management of local drainage. The project will be required to provide electric, telephone and cable service through the applicable providers. Service is available adjacent to the site. The applicant will be required to construct connections to these services to the standards established by each service provider. f,g) No Impact. Burrtec, the City's solid waste contractor, will serve the proposed facility. Trash generated by the project will be hauled to the transfer station located in Cathedral City, west of the City, and then will be transported to one of four regional landfills. All four landfills have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project. Burrtec is required to meet all local, regional, State and federal standards for solid waste disposal. Mitigation: Not required. Monitoring: Not required. -43- Washington/50 IS Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a X plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage X of long-term environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when X viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial X adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? a) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The proposed project is located on the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50 and is surrounded by previously disturbed lands. As detailed in Section IV, there are mitigation measures, which comply with the MBTA that will ensure impacts to sensitive species are reduced to less than significant levels. The development of the project will not result in negative impacts to any important examples of California history or prehistory. Potential impacts to paleontological resources have been mitigated to less than significant levels in this Initial Study. b) Less than Significant Impact. Currently, the site's land use and zoning is designated as residential. The proposed project will be a commercial development with a gas station and car wash component. General Plan Amendment (GPA), Change of Zone (ZC), and Conditional -44- Washington/50 IS Use Permit (CUP) applications have been submitted to the City. Upon approval of the GPA, ZC, and CUP, the project will be consistent with long-term goals. A less than significant impact is anticipated. c) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Section III contains mitigation measures to ensure that any cumulative project -related impacts shall be mitigated to less than significant levels. d) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The project's potential environmental effects have been mitigated to a less than significant level by the measures outlined in the Initial Study and development requirements of the City of La Quinta. Further, as mitigated the project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. This City intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the supporting documentation herein. References -45- Washington/50 IS City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan City of La Quinta Municipal Code. CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2 "Report E-5: Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2011- 2014, with 2010 Benchmark," CA Dept. of Finance, Demographic Research Unit, May 1, 2014. 2003 Coachella Valley MSHCP FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel #2233G CA Department of Toxic Substances SCAQMD CEQA Handbook 2003 PM10 Plan for the Coachella Valley SCAQMD 2012 Air Quality Management Plan California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping California Scenic Highway Mapping System " Washington 50 Project — Traffic Impact Analysis" prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc. August 14, 2015. "Biological Resources Assessment Technical Report", prepared by Barrett's Biological Surveys, July 2015. "Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Washington 50 7.48 Acre Project" prepared by Tierra Environmental Services Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) prepared by the San Diego Natural History Museum "Noise Impact Analysis", prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc., Revised April 6 2016 "Invasive Species Summary Project", written by Angela Barranco. Last Edited: November 11, 2001; Last accessed: November 06, 2015. -46- CITY OF LA QUINTA MONITORING PROGRAM FOR CEQA COMPLIANCE DATE: April 16, 2016 ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.: 770-040-012 CASE NO.: General Plan Amendment 2015-0001, PROJECT LOCATION: SE Corner of Washington and Avenue 50 Zone Change 2015-0002, Site Development Permit 2015-0005, CUP 2015-0002, Tentative Parcel Map 30007/TPM 2015-0007 EA/EIR NO: EA 2015-0004 APPROVAL DATE: In Process APPLICANT: Chandi Group USA THE FOLLOWING REPRESENTS THE CITY'S MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION WITH THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE ABOVE CASE NUMBER SUMMARY MITIGATION MEASURES RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CHECKED BY DATE IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Survey for nesting birds per MBTA Planning Division Prior to ground disturbance Report by qualified biologist. Use covered trailers to remove Planning Division saltcedars During site grubbing. Field inspections. SUMMARY MITIGATION MEASURES RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CHECKED BY DATE V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Qualified palaeontologist to monitor Building Department During ground disturbing Report by qualified ground disturbing activities. activities. asbestos palaeontologist. SUMMARY MITIGATION MEASURES RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CHECKED BY DATE XII. NOISE All fixed and mobile construction Public Works Department During grading. Site inspections. equipment to be properly mufflered. All stationary equipment to emit noise Public Works Department During construction. Site inspections. away from sensitive receptors and be located as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Equipment to be shut down and not left Building Department During construction. Site inspections. to idle. Portable stationary equipment to be Building Department During construction. Site inspections. shielded, and directed away from sensitive receptors. Car Wash hours to be limited to 7 AM Code Compliance Operations. Site inspections. to 10 PM. T4ht 4 Zfv Q" MEMORANDUM TO: Chairperson Wilkinson and Planning Commissioners FROM: Gabriel Perez, Planning Manager DATE: April 26, 2016 SUBJECT: Notice of Correction and Clarification to Staff Report for Public Hearing Item No. 1 Public Hearing Item No. 1: Environmental Assessment 2015-0004 General Plan Amendment 2015-0001 Zone Change 2015-000 Tentative Parcel Map 2015-0007 Conditional Use Permit 2015-0002 Site Development Permit 2015-0005 Applicant: Chandi Group, USA Request: proposing the construction of a 52,800 square -foot commercial center on 7.6 acres. Project: Washington 50. CEQA: Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program. Location: southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50. 1. Staff circulated and posted a Staff Report for this item and applications, which contained ambiguities as to Staffs recommendations to the Planning Commission and the interrelationship of the various applications submitted. Staff erroneously included under "RECOMMENDED ACTION" that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2015-0001 and Zone Change 2015-0002. Rather, as noted in the text of the Staff Report, Staff is not making a recommendation to approve, approve with modifications, or deny the General Plan Amendment or Zone Change. Staff has presented the proposed project and provided the findings that must be made in order for the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to be approved. Depending on the Planning Commission's consideration and direction to Staff once the public hearing has completed, Staff will prepare on behalf of the Planning Commission, in accordance with State and City laws, a written recommendation that will be transmitted to the City Council with respect to whether the Planning Commission recommends approval, approval with modifications, or denial of the General Plan Amendment and/or Zone Change. Furthermore, only the City Council may approve the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. City law specifies that, when permit applications have been combined as they have with the above -referenced item, the final decision on the combined application is to be made by the highest applicable decision -making authority under City law, which is the City Council in connection with the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. To the extent the Staff Report has recommendations to adopt Environmental Assessment 2015-0004 and to approve Tentative Parcel Map 2015-0007, Conditional Use Permit 2015-0002, and Site Development Permit 2015-0005, Staffs recommendations to the Planning Commission are intended to be contingent on the approval of both the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, if approved by the City Council. In other words, unless General Plan Amendment 2015-0001 and Zone Change 2015- 0002 are approved, none of the other applications may be approved and the mitigated negative declaration is not necessary. 2. Attachment 1 shall be amended to state that the commercial development is 52,000 52,800 square feet and that the location is the southeast corner nda.m..S. Street nnrl Auto Centro nWashington Street and Avenue 50. 3. Initial Study: The Aesthetics Table I.a on page 8 shall be marked with an X to identify a "Less than Significant Impact." The Geology and Soils Table V1.a on page 20 shall be marked with an X to identify "No Impact." Page 2 of 2 T4t�t 4 ,Cu'aulHfw MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Chairperson and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Gabriel Perez, Planning Manager DATE: April 26, 2016 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2015-0004 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2015-0001 ZONE CHANGE 2015-0002 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 2015-0007 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2015-0002 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2015-0005 WASHINGTON 50 Attached as part of this memorandum, please find additional correspondence received regarding the proposed Environmental Assessment 2015-0004, General Plan Amendment 2015-0001, Zone Change 2015-0002, Tentative Parcel Map 2015- 0007, Conditional Use Permit 2015-0002, and Site Development Permit 2015-0005 for the proposed Washington 50 Project: OPPOSITION: Richard R. Fredericks, La Quinta, California (April 26, 2016) Angelo and Bernie Alioto, La Quinta, California (April 26, 2016) Evie Connell Sproul, La Quinta, California (April 26, 2016) Richard Drucker, MD, La Quinta, California (April 26, 2016) Kemper Eakle (April 26, 2016) Ray C. Largo, La Quinta, California (April 26, 2016 SUPPORT: Shawn Harkness, La Quinta, California (April 26, 2016 This correspondence was received by the Design and Development Department after the staff report was completed and the agenda packet was delivered to the Planning Commission. (_-IfTY OF LA QUINTA CALIFORNIA Richard R. Fredericks 7016 APR 26 Pill 2: 15 53810 Del Gato Drive La Quinta, CA 92253 April 26, 2016 Via Hand Delivery Robert Wilkinson, Chair Philip Bettencourt, Vice -Chair Frank Blum Kathleen Fitzpatrick Robert "Bob" Wright City of La Quinta Planning Commission City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Comments on April 26, 2016 Planning Commission Agenda Item #1 (Public Hearing): Environmental Assessment 2015-0004, General Plan Amendment 2015-0001, Zone Change 2015-0002, Tentative Parcel Map 2015-0007, Conditional Use Permit 2015-0002, and Site Development Permit 2015-0005 submitted by Chandi Group, USA proposing the construction of a 52,000 square -foot commercial center on 7.6 acres. Project: Washington 50. CEQA: Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program. Location: southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 52. Dear Chair Wilkinson, Vice -Chair Bettencourt, Members of the Planning Commission and Mr. Perez: I am a resident of La Quinta, California and oppose the above -referenced proposed project consisting of the proposed construction of a 52,000 square foot commercial center on approximately 7.6 acres of undeveloped land at southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50 in the City of La Quinta, California (hereinafter "Washington 50 Project"). I appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments to the City of La Quinta Planning Commission in connection with its consideration of the proposed General Plan Amendment 2015-001, Zone Change 2015-0002, Tentative Parcel Map 2015-007, Conditional Use Permit 2015-002, Site Development Permit 2015-0005 and Mitigated Negative Declaration/ Environmental Assessment 2015-0004. The Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 26, 2016 ("Staff Report"), which includes the Environmental Initial Study for the Washington 50 Project which is the subject of the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration ("NOV), describes the proposed Washington 50 Project as a commercial development on the undeveloped land consisting of a 6,000 square foot convenience store with in-store deli and a gas station with 20 pumps, a 4,000 square foot automated car wash building, a 2,300 square foot fast food restaurant with drive -through service, a 3,700 square foot restaurant and two 18,000 square foot buildings for retail and office use. In other words, the proposed Washington 50 Project is a mega -gas station with a mini -mart, a fast food restaurant with drive through service, and two large office buildings. This proposed project requires a change in land use and zoning designation from "Medium Density Residential" to "Community Commercial" and the NOI states that it has been determined that "no potentially significant effects on the environment are anticipated as a result" of the proposed Washington 50 Project. (NOI, April 13, 2016.) As a threshold issue, I find the Staff Report's callous indifference to the significant adverse environmental effects, including aesthetic, noise, air quality and traffic impacts, disturbing. The undeveloped parcel is surrounded by quiet, upscale residential communities reflective of La Quinta's beauty and charm. The Duna La Quinta residential community is located within 170 feet of the proposed Washington 50 Project. Placing a 24 hour commercial operation in such surroundings will have negative adverse impacts. Moreover, the proposed Washington 50 Project is located adjacent to a Sports and Youth center, an elementary school, a middle school and a boys and girls club. Yet, inexplicably, the impact of toxic air contaminants from the gasoline service station and idling cars at the drive through restaurant were not considered. The Staff Report and Environmental Initial Study do not address the true significant negative effects and do not provide substantial evidence to support the findings. The proposed Washington 50 Project threatens adverse effect on public health and safety and the environment. The Staff Report also ignores the fact that the City of La Quinta's General Plan mandates the preparation of an environmental impact report ("EIR"). It cannot be denied that the proposed project conflicts with the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed project requires an amendment to the General Plan because it conflicts with it. The proposed project requires a change in the site's zoning because the proposed project is not allowed under the existing zoning. As a result, under the provisions of the General Plan duly adopted by the City Council, an EIR is mandated. Accordingly, I urge the Planning Commission to reject the proposed Washington 50 Project without a full EIR. I. The City of La Quinta's Review Process Fails to Provide for Adequate Public Participation and Environmental Review. The California Environmental Quality Act's ("CEQA") overriding purpose is to ensure that agencies regulating activities that may affect the quality of the environment give primary consideration to preventing environmental damage. When CEQA applies, the relevant governmental agency must conduct an initial study to determine if the project at issue may have a significant effect on the environment. "Significant effect on the environment" means a "substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic of aesthetic significant." (14 Cal. Code. Regs. § 15382; Keep Our Mountains Quiet v. County of Santa Clara (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 714, 729.) The CEQA process was designed specifically to ensure that public agencies address significant effects on the environment. "Public participation is an essential part of the CEQA process." (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15201.) However, the timing of the environmental review for the proposed Washington 50 Project seems designed to minimize public participation. CEQA provides that if an agency holds a hearing on other project approvals, that hearing should include environmental issues. (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15202(b).) The NOI public comment period closes May 2, 2016. Yet, the Planning Commission is considering this matter before the close of the environmental comment period. It simply cannot consider any of the public comments on the NOI — those comments have not yet been submitted. The City of La Quinta should be making every effort to include the public in the planning and CEQA review process, but its timing of the various hearings and project approvals is foreclosing such participation and ensuring that environmental issues will not be considered as part of the approval process. II. An EIR Is Required. CEQA's legal standards establish a preference for mandating an EIR because issuing a mitigated negative declaration ("MND") truncates the CEQA process. (Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 322, 332.) An agency proposing to rely upon a MND must make the analysis accompanying the proposed MND as complete and comprehensive as possible. (Long Beach Savings and Loan Assn. v. Long Beach Redevelopment Agency (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 249, 263.) A court will evaluate whether substantial evidence exists to support a fair argument that the stated mitigation measures may not achieve the goal of reducing the impacts below a level or levels of significance when considering whether to require a full EIR or permit a MND instead. (Citizen's Com. To Save Our Village v. City of Claremont (1995) 37 Cal. App.4th 1157.) The initial study cannot be a pro forma exercise, devoid of facts to support its conclusions. Courts note that the fair argument standard referenced previously cannot be mechanically applied when a local agency fails to undertake an adequate initial study. The government has the burden of environmental investigation. As discussed below, with respect to certain criteria, the City of La Quinta ("City") has failed to sustain its burden. Insufficient evidence supports the initial study's conclusions. There is also substantial evidence to support a fair argument that the proposed mitigation measures will not reduce the impacts below the applicable level of significance. Based upon the foregoing, an EIR must be prepared instead of a MND. III. The Initial Study's and MND's Analysis is Inadequate and Inaccurate. The initial study is intended to provide the City with sufficient information regarding the project to allow the City to determine the appropriate environmental review. In this case, because a MND is being considered, the initial study must document the factual basis for the finding that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The record must support the conclusions reached by the initial study. (Lighthouse Field Beach Rescue v. City of Santa Cruz (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 1170, 1201.) If an agency fails to gather information and undertake an adequate environmental analysis in its initial study, a MND is inappropriate. (El Dorado County Taxpayers for Quality Growth v. County of El Dorado (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1591, 1597.) As set forth below on the various areas of environmental concern identified in the Washington 50 Project Planning Commission Staff Report and initial study, the City has failed to gather accurate information and failed to undertake an adequate environmental analysis. Accordingly, a MND is inappropriate. I. Aesthetics. Any substantial, negative effect of a project on view and other features of beauty may constitute a significant adverse environmental impact under CEQA. (Quail Botanical Gardens Foundation, Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1604.) Threshold (a) (scg�a) This threshold considers whether the proposed project will impact scenic vistas. The initial study concludes that the impact will be less than significant. This conclusion is not supported by any substantial evidence. The proposed Washington 50 Project includes a zoning change from "Medium Density Residential" to "Community Commercial." This proposed zoning change will permit substantially greater heights for the building structures. The proposed Washington 50 Project includes two 2-story buildings forty (40) feet from the top of the tower elements and thirty (30) feet from the top of the parapet. Nonetheless, the initial study concludes that scenic vistas will not be impacted. Homes in the surrounding residential communities are elevated and currently look down upon the golf course and the scenic vista consisting of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Homes along Doral Street in La Quinta Fairways have virtually unobstructed views of the Santa Rosa Mountains. While the initial study concluded that the impact on these views will be minimal (and incorrectly identified the nearest residential community as within 450 feet when it is within 180 feet), the proposed Washington 50 Project substantially blocks the scenic vista. Illustrated by the developer in its proposed scenic view from the golf course fairway depicts plainly that the views of the Santa Rosa Mountains will be substantially blocked and these homes will instead have a view of a wall and a commercial structure. The initial study's conclusion that the impact will be less than significant is not supported by the facts. The City frequently touts the scenic aspects and related benefits of the Santa Rosa Mountains. No factual support is given for the conclusion that the views of the Santa Rosa Mountains will be "minimally obstructed." Instead, the only "factual evidence" — a developer illustration — indicates that the scenic vista will be substantially blocked with a commercial development. Moreover, any resident of the surrounding residential community can provide testimony describing how the views will be blocked by the proposed Washington 50 Project and the scenic vista will be interrupted by the proposed project's light pollution as well. The initial study's conclusion is flawed and is not supported by any facts. Accordingly, an EIR is mandated. Thre 1i1 (!) (scenic resource) No comment. 1`11resliolti (c) (existi€ig visual character) This threshold considers whether the proposed project will substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. The conclusion is reached that the proposed project will have less than a significant impact based upon the analysis that the subject site is "currently vacant with sparse vegetation growth and provides little to no visual quality to its surroundings." Accordingly, it is determined that any impact is "less than significant." This cavalier approach to dismissing the aesthetic value of undeveloped land indicates the City is failing to consider the environmental impacts of development. Moreover, the proposed Washington 50 Project consists of a 24 hours commercial development smack in the middle of quiet, upscale residential communities. Such a development could not be more visually jarring and disruptive to the aesthetics of the existing community. Further, the initial study utterly fails to consider the impact of lighting due to the commercial development. Neon signage, lights for safety and security, and other lighting associated with a 24 hour commercial operation will cause significant light pollution and degrade the existing visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings. The surrounding residential communities have "dark skies" policies which do not even allow street lights. This is discussed in more detail with respect to Threshold (d) below. Moreover, the initial study does not consider the impact to visual character or quality of the surrounding area as a result of additional trash, pollution and litter must be evaluated and mitigated. Fast food restaurants and minimarts are notorious for disposable packaging and resulting trash. This will result in waste, trash, debris and litter in and around the commercial development, and also in the surrounding residential community. Garbage, trash and litter will also attract vermin and will need to be removed quickly, to preserve the aesthetic qualities and prevent nuisance odor impacts. Trash removal will also need to be conducted in the surrounding communities and affected roadways, and those areas into which trash can be blown. Additionally, the impact on the native habitat and bird and wildlife populations should be considered. Ingestion of plastic, cigarette butts and chewing gum left strewn about harms our wildlife and pollutes our waterways. The initial study fails to adequately discuss lighting impacts. No evidence whatsoever is given to support the initial study's conclusion that that compliance with the City's building codes and lighting ordinances will result in proposed project impact's being less than significant. There is no raw evidence whatsoever to support this conclusion. Any 24 hour commercial operation of a gasoline service station, fast food restaurant, and minimart will require significant artificial lighting to attract customers and provide safety and security. The entire project will require substantial artificial lighting, creating light pollution and a permanent night time glow. The initial study has failed to analyze these impacts or provide any evidence to support its conclusions. There is simply no analysis. There is no discussion of light impacts to the surrounding residential community and the known adverse health effects. I also note that such lighting can be disruptive to wildlife, and such impacts should also be considered. II. Agricultural Resources. Thresholds (a) tltrougIL( ), inclusive No comments. III. Air Quality. Threshold (a) No comment. Threshold (b) I have been unable to adequately analyze the initial study's conclusions with respect to a violation of air quality standards or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation because the raw data upon which the initial study's analysis was based were not provided online. The CEQA Guidelines provide that "whenever possible" environmental information should be made available in electronic format on the Internet, and yet, I have been unable to locate any data or summary of data to support the statements in the initial study to evaluate the conclusions with respect to air quality impacts. I believe that the initial study fails to evaluate the emission of toxic air contaminants from the gasoline service station and exhaust from idling vehicles during operation adequately. These may result in a violation of air quality conditions related to toxic air contaminants. There also should be modeling of toxic air contaminants to determine whether warnings will be required for the surrounding community under Proposition 65. These adverse impacts are discussed in more detail with respect to VIII, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Threshold (c). 1111-esllold (c) I have been unable to adequately analyze the initial study's conclusions with respect to any net increase of any criteria because the raw data upon which the initial study's analysis was based were not provided online. The CEQA Guidelines provide that "whenever possible" environmental information should be made available in electronic format on the Internet, and yet, I have been unable to locate any data or summary of data to support the statements in the initial study to evaluate the conclusions with respect to air quality impacts. Tlreshold (d) I am concerned that the discussion in this Threshold (d) for Air Quality seems to completely overlook the sensitive receptors consisting of children attending nearby schools and accessing baseball/soccer field on Avenue 50. The Harry S. Truman Elementary School and the La Quinta Middle School are approximately 0.4 miles from the proposed Washington 50 Project. The discussion does not evaluate health impacts to students playing outside on the various fields which are in close proximity or riding or walk their bikes to and from the school, the Boys and Girls Club and the YMCA Preschool and Child Enrichment Center. Additionally, the La Quinta Sports Complex is approximately 575 feet away. Importantly, the initial study only considers criteria pollutants, and overlooks the various toxic air contaminants present in gasoline and diesel, and which volatilize during fueling operations. While the pumps may have vapor recovery systems, it is common for small spills during fill up — the type of spills that every driver has experienced when putting gasoline in the car. Those spills can add up to significant toxic air contaminant emissions as the petroleum hydrocarbons volatilize in California's always sunny atmosphere. Additionally, gasoline and diesel engine exhaust from idling vehicles at the fast food restaurant drive through emit many different toxic air contaminants. It is clear that the initial study's conclusion that the proposed project's impact of exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant conclusions is not supported by facts and fails to consider reasonable impacts resulting from the gasoline service station impacts and idling exhausts. I also note that restaurant cooking can emit various toxic air contaminants. Piresliolcl (e) The initial study fails to consider objectionable odors generated during operations, particularly from food waste and trash, as well as petroleum odors from the gasoline service station. Such potentially adverse environmental effects from odors during operations must be considered. IV. Biological Resources. Thresholds (a)_(e) The initial study seems to overlook the impact of light pollution and noise from operations, as opposed to construction activities, on various species. For example, there appears to be no consideration to the impact on bat species, which can be severely adversely effected by artificial lighting and noise. V. Cultural Resources. Tlis-esholds {a)_(d) No comments. VI. Geology and Soils. No comments. VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. No comments. VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Thresho ds (a) and (b) No comment. 1"lire (c) The initial study inaccurately identifies the closest schools. The Harry S Truman Elementary School and the La Quinta Middle School are both located approximately 0.4 miles from the proposed Washington 50 Project. The initial study fails to identify the La Quinta Middle School. The playground/recess areas and the baseball/soccer field on Avenue 50 are located even closer. The initial study fails to analyze or even consider the emissions of toxic air contaminants such as the carcinogen benzene from the gasoline service station and fast food restaurants. The initial study does not provide any evidence or facts to justify its conclusion. There is simply no data to conclude that the standard regulations for such facilities will assure that the impact will be less than significant. There is no comparison to thresholds for toxic air contaminants at sensitive receptor locations. At a minimum, a screening level health risk assessment should evaluate the exposure of sensitive receptors — schools, the Boys and Girls Club and the YMCA Preschool and Child Enrichment Center. Tliresholds_WL--(h) No comment. IX. Hydrology and Water Quality. No comments. X. Land Use and Planning. Thresh Id (a) No comment. "Thresh (b)_ The initial study concludes that the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change will have a less than significant impact because they will be limited to the site and will not intrude into the residential land uses. The reasoning is circular. It is not the analysis required by CEQA. The analysis required by CEQA is whether the proposed Washington 50 Project conflicts with any applicable land use plan, policy of regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environment effect. The proposed Washington 50 Project directly contravenes and conflicts with the City's General Plan which was adopted for the purpose of avoiding and mitigating environment effects and providing for orderly development. By its very nature, this Washington 50 Project requires a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to designate the site "General Commercial" from Medium Density Residential. Of course the proposed project conflicts. Specifically, the proposed Washington 50 Project conflicts with the existing General Plan, the Housing Element and the Zoning Ordinance. "The general plan is atop the hierarchy of local government law regulating land use." (Neighborhood Action Group v. County of Calaveras (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 1176, 1183.) A general planis the ultimate controlling document for future development in a local jurisdiction, and controls over other local land use regulations, including zoning. (De Vita v. Napa (1995) 9 caL.4TH 763, 773.) Consistency with the general plan is fundamental and "[i]t is the principle which infused the concept of planned growth with the force of law." (Debottari v. City of Norco (1985) 171 Cal.App.3d 1204, 1213.) The proposed Washington 50 Project is inconsistent with the General Plan. It should be noted that the City's General Plan is founded on principles such as a "neighborhood oriented community" and "resort oriented community" — two principles directly at odds with putting a 24 hours mega gasoline service station and fast food restaurants, along with two office buildings, in the middle of residential communities. The proposed Washington 50 Project would result in a violation of the Land Use Policy LU-1.2, which provides that "[a]ll land use decisions shall be consistent with all applicable General Plan policies and programs and shall uphold the rights and needs of property owners as well as those of the general public." It would also result in a violation of Policy LU-3.1, which provides for the "preservation of neighborhood character and assure a consistent and compatible land use pattern." It would also result in a violation of Goal LU-4, which provides for the "maintenance and protection of existing neighborhoods." It would violation Policy LU-4.1, which provides that "compatible development adjacent to existing neighborhoods and infrastructure" will be encouraged. Instead, the proposed project is an incompatible development inconsistent with the current zoning. Thresh 1 W No comment. XI. Mineral Resources. No comments. XII. Noise. Threshold (a). The initial study concludes a less than significant impact based upon a flawed baseline analysis. The noise study is based upon a traffic study conduct on August 6, 2015, a period not representative of typical conditions considering that none of the schools were in session and that many of the Valley residents were not present because they are seasonal or due to vacations. August is a peak vacation time due to the oppressive heat, and the first day of instruction for the nearby schools was August 26, 2015. It should be noted that "[r]elevant personal observations of area residents on nontechnical subjects may qualify as substantial evidence." (Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903, 928.) An accurate baseline is critical to the CEQA initial study. A proper baseline to evaluate the proposed project's impacts would be while school is in session, and not during a month known to be peak vacation traveling time A reasonable assumption from the evaluation of traffic impacts during the known "slow" season is that the traffic impact assumptions are substantially under counter. The initial study contends that the main source of exterior noise is due to traffic. Accordingly, a flawed baseline renders the analysis inaccurate and incomplete. The initial study's conclusion that there is less than a significant impact is not supported by any accurate facts. I also note that I was unable to review the Noise Impact Analysis for these comments because it is not available online as advocated by the CEQA Guidelines. There may be additional errors in the data. The initial study appears to be focused on noise from traffic impacts and the car wash, but does not seem to consider noise impacts from car radios and similar while idling at the drive through, etc. While there is a proposed mitigation measure to limit the car wash, there seems to be no evaluation of nighttime impacts from the fast food restaurant. Of course, excessive noise impacts daily activities of the neighboring residential communities. Additionally, the initial study seems to consider only the residential neighborhood, and fails to analyze whether noise levels during week days will impact surrounding schools, including the nearby elementary and preschools. Moreover, the fact that the absolute noise level thresholds may not be exceeded does not necessarily mean that the proposed project has less than a significant impact when it comes to noise. With respect to noise, an EIR may be required when substantial evidence supports a fair argument that the project may have significant unmitigated noise impacts, even if other evidence shows that the project will not generate noise in excess of the local noise ordinance. In this case, it is clear that the project will generate noise from the restaurant, from the car wash, from idling vehicles, from the gasoline service station activities, etc., in addition to the increase in traffic. All of these suggest that the project will have unmitigated noise impacts which will cause a significant adverse impact. Threshold {b) We believe that the initial study improperly dismisses and fails to consider the impact of groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels on the residential communities and educational facilities from operations. Groundborne noise impacts result from: Perceptible vibration, i.e. vibration of floors, walls, etc. inside buildings that can be perceived by humans through tactile sensation, contact of whole body parts with the vibrating surfaces or audible motion such as the rattling of windows; and Low frequency noise, i.e. sound waves usually radiated by the vibrating surfaces inside buildings that are perceived by the human ear as noise. These can be generated by the sort of equipment, including truck delivery traffic, associated with the proposed project. An initial study must have some factual basis to conclude there will be less than a significant impact. The initial study does not provide any raw data to support a conclusion that operations will not result in groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. Such must be evaluated to determine if they can be mitigated. Threshold (c). This threshold concerns the permanent increase in ambient noise. I remain concerned about the inaccurate baseline used to determine ambient noise, and the failure to consider other ambient noise sources, particularly during nighttime operations other than the car wash. TLiresholds_(U (e) and (D No comment. XIII. Population and Housing No comments. XIV. Public Services No comments. XV. Recreation No comments. XVII. Transportation/Traffic I hresholds_(a),_(b) and (c) It is difficult to evaluate traffic impacts because the initial study uses an inaccurate baseline as previously discussed. The traffic study data collection event occurred on August 6, 2015. At that time, none of the schools were in session (school started August 26,' 2015) and many of the residents were out of town (August is a prime vacation time due to the oppressive heat and data available at the Assessor's Office indicates that many residents are season). Traffic impacts are a significant concern to the surrounding residential communities, particularly since traffic and noise are related. The flawed and inaccurate baseline seemingly intentionally completed during a very low volume traffic date and time renders the initial study unsupported. Moreover, the initial study could not adequately evaluate the impact on school -related traffic patterns. Of particular concern is whether a disruption to the traffic pattern will impact the safety of the students. Traffic impacts must be evaluated thoroughly and all feasible mitigation measures implemented. Threshoids_(d)=(g) No comments. XVII. Utilities and Service Systems. No comments. IV. Conclusion In closing, it is difficult to understand how the proposed project can be approved with a MND. The proposed project simply is inconsistent with the General Plan. CEQA requires an EIR whenever a project may have a significant adverse impact on the environment. (Public Res. Code § 21141.) An MND is appropriate only when, due to mitigation measures, there is not a fair argument that there may be adverse impacts. Because the initial study provides an inadequate analysis of the impacts and fails to provide factual support for many of its conclusions of less than a significant impact, and because of the substantial evidence to support a fair argument that many impacts may be significant, a full IER must be prepared. Moreover, the City's General Plan provides: All development proposals must be analyzed and tested for consistency with the goals, policies and programs in every applicable element of the General Plan. Specific Plans and the Zoning Ordinance must be consistent with the General Plan. General Plan consistency is also a required criteria for determining significant impacts under CEQA. (General Plan, Administration, p. I-6.) More importantly, the General Plan provides: State CEQA Guidelines require that an initial study include "an examination of whether the project is compatible with existing zoning and plans." The State CEQA Guidelines further stipulate that, "A project will normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where it is located." If a determination is made by the Planning Commission of the City Council that the proposed action is inconsistent with the General Plan, no further action shall be taken without the completion and processing of an EIR which would support a finding of overriding consideration. (General Plan, Administration, p. I-7 (emphasis added).) Based upon the foregoing, it is readily apparent that an EIR is mandatory. Accordingly, I urge the Planning Commission not to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed Washington 50 Project and instead recommend that a full EIR be prepared. Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments. Vexy truly ours, t �1 �. Zt chard R. Fredericks Mr. Wilkinson, Chair Mr. Bettencourt, Vice -Chair Members of the Planning Commission Mr. Perez April 26, 2016 Page PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 15 Wanda Wise -Latta From: Angelo Alioto <angelo_alioto@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 ISO PM To: Community Development Webmail Cc: Bernie Alioto Subject: 50th at Washington proposed Project City of La Quinta CA Planning Department La Quinta City Council Linda Evans, Mayor As residents of La Quinta (77865 Laredo Ct) we are opposed to this project. A complete Environmental Report must be completed to investigate the negative impact of this project on our community. Some concerns are, but not limited to, as follows: Noise Automobiles Car Wash Sewer load impact Traffic Trucks Automobiles Excess lighting Pollution Air Noise Trash Flood control Land fill impact Loitering Project is too close to Elementary Schools, Boys and Girls Club and Sports Field This project is a creative nuisance. It certainly is not compatible with the charm, style or ambiance of La Quinta Village and/or its current businesses. We do not want a car wash and drive through Taco Bell as the gateway to our charming community. Thank you Angelo and Bernie Alioto 77865 Laredo Ct. La Quinta CA Sent from my iPhone 1 Wanda Wise -Latta From: Teresa Thompson Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 2:26 PM To: Gabriel Perez Cc: Wanda Wise -Latta Subject: OPPOSE Chandi CONNELL For your log Teresa Thompson I Deputy City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico - La Quinta, CA 92253 760.777.7030 tthompson@Ia-quinta.org Weosite: www.La-Quinta.or From: Evie Connell Sproul [mailto:ev.cen er-dc.rr.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 2:23 PM To: Council Subject: be aware I live 270 FEET from where Mr. Chandi wants to change the zoning and build whatever he wants to. Do you have a guarantee from him as to what he will build? Or maybe he won't build at all but might sell the land to someone else after he gets the zone change? If he does in fact build the gas station project he will be taking business away from the village. Do you want to see the village with even more empty restraints, etc? There are thousands of us living in La Quinta that have voted for all of you. If you give Mr. Chandi the permit to build on Washington & 50th, it will be the end to your job on the council and as Mayor. Please make the right choice for us citizens of our city. You promised to serve us the residents of La Quinta. This is our city! Residents of Duna La Quinta Wanda Wise -Latta From: Teresa Thompson Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 10:42 AM To: Gabriel Perez Cc: Wanda Wise -Latta Subject: FW: Project at 50th and Washington Hi — for the log! Teresa Thompson I Deputy City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico , La Quinta, CA 92253 760.777.7030 tthornpson@la-guinta.or website: www.La-Quinta.ore From: richard drucker [mailto:doctordru sbcglobal.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 9:41 AM To: Council Cc: e7g nalq@gmail.com Subject: Project at 50th and Washington To whom it may concern, I have been an Emergency Physician for 35+ years. I am familiar with the patterns of environmental discomfort, patterns of criminal behavior, and the need to keep a considerable separation between elements that create these forces from our children. There is considerable child traffic past this area from the school to their homes. There will be a real increase in danger with automobile traffic in and out of this area, making sharp turns in and out of the proposed development, There is a steep hill down from the school area which will increase the speed of deceleration of vehicles into the Center. Not a good mix with children egressing from School and the Boys and Girls Club. The other issue for me, which is a clear distortion of need, is the idea of 24hour convenience store. This is completely unnecessary for the community. The Emergency Department traffic after 11 PM becomes a Mash Unit for players who are intoxicated and looking for trouble. Is that what you want to bring into a residential area? As the representatives of our Families needs, one must consider what is more important: safety versus financial aggrandizement. Very truly yours, Richard Drucker MD Wanda Wise -Latta From: Kemper Eakle <akeak1e111@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 8:23 AM To: Community Development Webmail Subject: Chandi Plan I am unable to attend the meeting today on the captioned plan at Washington and Avenue 50, but wish to post my extreme objection to Chandi's monstrosity proposed to be located in a residential community. There are already too many unoccupied buildings in downtown La Quinta, too many competing restaurants and too many homes that would be affected by the approval of this project. Imagine a car wash, gas pumps and am/pm market. Just too ridiculous. Find revenue another way and tell Chandi that he can't be bought regardless of his contributions to the chamber of commerce. Sent from my Pad April 25, 2016 Mayor Linda Evans City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Mayor Evans and City Council members: I am writing to you to object to a proposal submitted in August to the City Planning Department concerning the rezoning from mid -density residential to commercial a 7.63- acre piece of property at the southeast corner of Avenue 50 and Washington Street. Chandi Group of Indio has proposed building a 10-pump gasoline station, AM -PM Mini Mart, car wash, two fast-food restaurants and two 9,000 square foot, two-story office retail buildings on this site. This is property that is zoned mid -density residential, and there is no need for this kind of development in such a zone. Indeed, there is already a gasoline station and mini- market approximately one mile away next to the Post Office in Old Town La Quinta, and there is a Circle K mini -market on Calle Tampico just a few hundred yards from City Hall and the Public Library. This development would siphon business away from the Village center, which the city council has spent years trying to reinvigorate. This proposed development would bring noise, exhaust, signage and light pollution to a residential neighborhood and would no doubt damage property values of nearby residences. It would be close to two schools and a Boys and Girls Club, ingress and egress to the site would be suspect and traffic at Avenue 50 and Washington Street, which already has a very long light, would be a mess. The development would potentially attract the homeless and increase crime. For the above reasons I ask that you do not change the zoning from mid -density residential to commercial. Thank you for listening. Sincerely, R Ray C Largo 79085 Big Horn Trail La Quinta, CA 92253 (Painted Cove) cc: Wallace Nesbit, case planner, Frank Spevacek, city manager Wanda Wise -Latta From: Sent: To: Teresa Thompson Tuesday, April 26, 2016 12:30 PM Wanda Wise -Latta Subject: FW: Support project at Washington and 50 For your log Teresa Thompson I Deputy City Clerk City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico - La Quinta, CA 92253 760,777.7030 tthompson@la-guinta.org website: www.La-Quinta.or From: Linda Evans Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 11:21 AM To: Shawn Harkness Cc: Council; Frank Spevacek; Gabriel Perez Subject: Re: Support project at Washington and 50 Shawn - Thank you for your submission. We will be sure to share it with the Planning Commissioners and Council Members. Linda Evans 760-777-7030 �::760-899-3279 Website I Map levanslo-quinta.org � U On Apr 26, 2016, at 10:14 AM, Shawn Harkness <shawnhark , gil.coa„> wrote: As a full time, year round resident of La Quinta I would like you to APPROVE the proposed development at the corner of Washington and Avenue 50. There is already traffic at this intersection, the area could use a second gas station in the area to encourage competition and it simply makes economic sense for the city and a large majority of La Quinta residents. Please do not let the loud and unfounded complaints of a few snowbirds ruin a good opportunity for the rest of us. Shawn Harkness Sent from my iPhone