The URL can be used to link to this page

MA 2003-514May 09 03 09:47a PHT end SUE HRRNSON 818"'a �,13 _ p.c P -p. �5-pty-©3 AA:19 city oo-aauinla Comin_Dev-DePt rl] 76 /3l 3 -�_. -"y OF LA QUINT C o. CI Community Development Department o s C APPLI CATION �'OR MANOR .1T�ST-AtVO'r �pP .I 1yL Submit this form with two copies of a scaled site plan, drawn to adrquately depict the datum of thz regr tit. I A nonrefundable fee of $200 is required when the Application is submitted. The check must be made p, able to the "Cin of La Quirata"_ A Minor Adjustment Permit (Section 9.210.040/Zoning Ordinance) may be Approved on1-- for det•i--Lon_ {•shack of up to ten percent of a numenieal development standard (for example, a reduction of one foot from a Iz�fs�J . requirement) or for deviations Specifically identified in the La Quints Zoning Ordinance. Utter de t ianmrs shall rccci*e consideration of a variance (pursuant to Section 9.210.030/Variance\Z011ing Ordinance). 1f the ADplicz-It is no, the C.-%mcr of the property, a letter rzrust he submittal by the owner authorizing the Applicant to execute this document in his beha If ViYiK##ii W1♦♦+MrR#r1WWrwc*i�N♦.'�i4+rMN'V1Va�W MM;A#11ti##+iVrW##**ty,wyw�M•#i#*t.WV♦♦Mr+.#V sYa:G l�i/�Yy�iiYd PLEASE PMT OR TYPE IDATE:_A)i,_ 9 2cso3 APPLICANT/CONTRACTOR: CONTACT PERSON ( DIFFERENT):/�F✓!v PiiC��'E �i� 5i :y Z /� G MAILING ADDRESS: -AD ddr (City) s) LStare) (Z.P) (A OW14Elz°SNAME: hlub Svc' MAIL1NCAJ) nSS:—_ e- (Address) (City) (State) iZiO' STREET ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 00 oa LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: ' LOB' h_ Z---j— TRACT — X6 7 ASSESSOR'S PACtC�L NUMBER: 7L- IADf I]STMENTPEQU-STF-D:� REASON FORREQUEST: D rfG LS i� S1GNATURE OF APPLICANT .� Sl ONATURh OF OWNER (ifnin the same as applccnnt)__ - — PL.ANNF2R: __..._ i'MN 7Y7TV V♦VHF IVi�w X>M###kW4V Ws+iY•##i}ii#*:k##bA1F M#7►Y*#.R.s+i Ac iiikiYXX'#kf##wVW`V7Vs;YF•7itYinii •'.fi��r Y��V The follPwing findings shall be made by the decision -making awhority prior to the approval 6f any -l}(ror Adjust.,ner, Fcn►� i t: 1. Consisteacy with (general Plan. The project is consistent With the General plan. 2. Concistgncy with Zoning Corte. The project is consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Coil:. 3. Complrance with CEQA. Proccssinb and approval of the permit application are in compliance with the renu.iremer,r_s of the California Environmental Quahly Act. 4. Slo ounding Uses. Approval of the application will not create conditions materially detrimental tc> ;ht public health.. safety and general wciface or injurious to or incompatible with other properties or land uses 3n the vicinit-.,. D ECE�V1E-- D r MAY O 9 2M �ITY �F Lh %O NTA rnr,.� AI IKI L\! I nP1 P.T 05-09-03 08:49 RECEIVED FROM:818 952 7613 I�QQN A 0 P.O. Box 1504 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO LA QUCNTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 May 12, 2003 Philip B. and Susan S. Branson 1051 Oxford Way La Canada, California 91011 F � cep y (760.) 777-7000 'FAX (760) 777-7101 Subject: Minor Adjustment 2003-514 for 53-600 Del Gato Dr. Re: Lot #103 of Tract 28867, Tradition Country Club Dear,Mr. and Mrs. Philip Branson: The Community Development Department has approved your request to build a custom, one story house on Del Gato Drive that has. roof features greater than 17 feet high within 150 feet of.Avenida Bermudas, pursuant to Section 9.210.040 (Minor Adjustments) of the Zoning Code. Finding in support of your application request are: 1 . No impact to the City's General Plan will occur with this adjustment request because the Land Use Element designates the site for residential purposes, and viewshed diagrams were taken out of the General Plan in March 2002. The proposed project meets in the intent of Policy 2 of the Land Use Element in that roof projections are "compatible" with existing residential neighborhoods. 2. This minor adjustment is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Zoning Code in that the roof elements do not exceed 28 feet in height as specified in the RL Zoning District per Section 9.30.030 of the Zoning Code. The proposed residential dwelling is similar in height to existing Cove houses when you take into account the difference in pad grades and the physical separation of Del Gato Drive and Avenida Bermudas as noted in the cross-section drawing prepared by your architect.. Furthermore, the lot was identified in the public record for Tentative Tract Maps 28470 (EA 96-333) and 28867 (EA 98-360) as being less of an impact to off -site houses because of the grading changes and parkway improvements. Under Section 5.50.060 of. the Zoning Code, houses may have architectural projections up to. three feet higher than the maximum building height.of 17 feet provided the feature does not contain any usable space (e.g., chimneys, vents, spires, etc.). Tower elements have been determined to comply with this section, provided they do not exceed a height of 22 feet within 150 feet of Avenida Bermudas; primary roofs shall not exceed 18.7 feet within 150 feet of Avenida Bermudas in order to be in compliance G:Setback Folder/MA Branson Fin a12003.wpd Ve with a 10% deviation provision specified in Section 9.210.040 of the Zoning Code. Architectural guidelines for The Tradition require the following: ."Recognizing that the residence home may have several levels, the elevation of the highest point of the roof structure must not exceed twenty-four feet (24') for all lots as measured from approved pad elevation. The maximum amount of roofing that can project between 18' - 24' above approved pad elevations is 35%. All other roof elements must stay below an eighteen -foot height limit." Additionally, no two story houses are permitted. This development provision has been in effect since review of Tract 28867 in 1998. The proposed construction plans for the single family dwelling comply with the intent of this development regulation. 3. The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 3 of Section 15303(a) which allows construction of a single family house on an existing lot of record. 4. There are special circumstances applicable to the property, including factors such as size, shape, topography, location or surroundings that justifyapproval of the adjustment. The. special circumstance is that the lot is eight feet lower than Avenida Bermudas ensuring views of the surrounding mountains by -Cove residents will be maintained even after the single story house is built: As designed, -roof -features complement-the--architectural--features-of-the-custom- home and enhance the marketability of The Tradition Country Club, thereby lessening the overall impact of the proposal. Additionally, the irregularly -shaped lot tapers to 52 feet wide at the rear property line which creates design challenges not apparent in other adjacent 0.5 acre parcels. 5. This minor adjustment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of this area of the City because building setbacks exceed the City's RL Zoning District standards and the final construction plans must. be approved by The Tradition HOA. This review does not cover any other vacant residential lot within The Tradition development, and all other development code parameters shall be met. .In summary, the construction plans on file with the Building and Safety Department meet the intent of the Zoning Code and Tract 28867, as prepared. Conditions of Approval: 1'. 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 adjustment application. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. 2. We find that we can approve the request provided a building permit is obtained from the Building & Safety Department by November 9, 2003. Otherwise, this approval shall expire and be of no use unless extended by this Department. This decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission, provided this Department receives your written request and filing fee of $175.00 by May 26, 2003, per Section 9.200.120 of the Zoning Code. Please also be aware that no other minor adjustments may be approved at this site as prescribed by existing Zoning Code provisions. Currently, our Department is processing a refund of the application fees in the amount of $1,550.00 because your Minor Adjustment fee is $200.00 instead of $1,750.00 as taken in on April -15. Should you have questions regarding this letter, please contact the undersigned at 760-777-7067, or via e-mail at gtrousde@la-quinta.org. The Municipal Code can be accessed on .the City's Web site by logging onto la-quinta.org. Very truly yours, J Y HER"AN ITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR EG SRO SDELL As a lanner GT. Enclosures c: Andrzej W. Weber, AIA Feiro Engineering, Inc. Classic Builders, Inc. Desert Resort Management Community Development Director Building and Safety Manager COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: May 6, 2003 ITEM TITLE: Approval of a Resolution Designating Speed Limits for Avenida Bermudas Between Avenue 52 and Calle Tecate RECOMMENDATION: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: 3 STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving designation of the legal speed limit on Avenida Bermudas between Avenue 52,and Calle Tecate as recommended in the "Speed Limit Study for the City of La Quinta," prepared by Paul Singer, P.E., a transportation engineering and planning consultant (Attachment 1). FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The estimated cost for sign placement on Avenida Bermudas is $500.00, which is available in the Public Works Streets Maintenance, Operating Supplies Account #101- 453-703-833, Street Signs. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: On September 17, 2002, City Council adopted Resolution No. 2002-131 designating speed limits for local streets. Although included in the .speed study, Aven.ida Bermudas between Avenue 52 and Calle Tecate was omitted°from this Resolution. This Resolution will lower the speed limit on Avenida Bermudas in this area from 45 miles per hour to 40 miles per hour. The California Vehicle Code authorizes cities to designate and regulate speed zones within their jurisdictions, based on an engineering and traffic survey, conducted in accordance with methods determined by the Department of Transportation. l The Municipal Code requires non statutory speed limits to be designated on the basis of an engineering and traffic survey. The speed limits become effective when adopted by City Council Resolution. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: California Vehicle Code defines the maximum speed limit as 65 miles per hour on divided roadways and 55 miles per hour on the remainder. Exceptions to this include residential areas and business districts, but the streets surveyed do not meet either of these exceptions. To establish a speed limit that uniformly fits the surrounding area, the City Council must approve an engineering and traffic survey, and designate speed limits that are legally enforceable. Speed data collected by the city engineering staff indicates critical speeds below the State mandated 65/55 mile per hour speed limits. Critical speed is defined as the eighty-fifth percentile speed, which is at or below the speed at which 85% of the traffic is moving. The posted speed limit is normally established by rounding up or down to the first five -mile -per -hour increment above or below the critical.speed. By adopting this Resolution, the Sheriff's Department will be able to enforce the speed limit with radar, within the specified roadway limits. The alternatives available to the City Council include: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving designation of the legal speed limits on Avenida Bermudas between Avenue 52 and Calle Tecate as recommended in the "Speed Limit Study for the City of La Quinta," prepared by Paul Singer, P.E., a transportation engineering and planning consultant; or 2. Do not adopt the Resolution, and keep the posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour on Avenida Bermudas between Avenue 52 and Calle Tecate; or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. RPcnartfi illy qi jhmittPri. �,4 dimothy onas n, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer 2 Attachments: 1 Approved for submission by: z�z Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Excerpt from Speed Limit Survey for City of La Quinta for Avenida Bermudas C" A RESOLUTION NO. 2003. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING THE SPEED LIMIT FOR AVENIDA BERMUDAS BETWEEN AVENUE 52 AND CALLE TECATE WHEREAS, the California Vehicle Code authorizes cities to designate and regulate. speed zones within their jurisdiction; and .WHEREAS, the City Council finds it appropriate to designate the speed limit on Avenida Bermudas, between Avenue 52 and Calle Tecate to facilitate safe and orderly traffic flow; and WHEREAS, said designation shall be made by resolution; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of Title 12.20 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, an engineering and traffic survey has been performed on Avenida Bermudas between Avenue 52 and Calle Tecate; and WHEREAS, the designated prima facie speed limit of 40 miles per hour is based on the results of the engineering and traffic survey. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: The prima facie speed limit of 40 miles per hour on Avenida Bermudas between Avenue 52 and Calle Tecate is most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and to be reasonably safe. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 6th day of May, 2003, by the following vote to wit: AYES:, NOES: ABSENT: - ABSTAIN: l Resolution No. 2003- Speed Limit Designation on Avenida Bermudas Adopted: May 6, 2003 Page 2 DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CMC, CITY CLERK City of La Quinta, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California 5 SPEEDPLOT Spot Speed Analysis Ver. 2.00A/McTRANS AWTIDA BERMUDAS: AVE. 52 TOOCATE ATTACHMENT 1 DIRECTION(S) ....... SOUTHBOUND 50TH PERCENTILE SPEED..................33 DATE...............'12/11/2001 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED ................. 40 TIME ..............., 1:35 10 MPH PACE SPEED .......... 27 through 36 POSTED SPEED LIMIT.45 MPH PERCENT IN PACE SPEED .............. 66.0 PERCENT OVER PACE SPEED............ 32.0 PERCENT UNDER PACE SPEED........... 2.0 CUM RANGE OFSPEEDS.................25 to 44 1MPH NO. PCT. PCT. VEHICLES OBSERVED.....................50 AVERAGE SPEED .......................33.9 0 0 0.0 0.0 1 0 0.0 0.0 . 2 0 0.0 0.0 3 0 0.0 0.0 4 0 0.0 0.0 5 0 0.0 .0.0 6 0 0.0 0.0 7 0 0.0 0.0 8 0 0.0 0.0 ` 9 0 0.0 0.0 10 0 0.0 0.0 1.1 0 0.0 0.0 12 0 0.0 0.0 13 0 0.0 0.0 14 0 0.0 0.0 15 0 0.0 0.0 16 0 0.0 0.0 17 0 0.0 0.0 18 0 0.0 O.Oi 19 0 0.0 0.0 20 0 0.0 0.0 21 0 0.0 0.0 22 0 0.0 0.0 23 0 0.0 0.0 24 0 0.0 0.0' 25 1 2.0 2.0 26 0 0.0 2.0 27 3 6.0 8.0 28 3 6.0 14.0 29 5 10.0 24.0 30 3 6.0' 30.0 31 5 10..0 40.0, 32 3 6.0 46.0 33 5 10.0 56.0 34 3 6.0 62.0 35 2 4.0 66.0 36 1 2.0 68.0 37 1 2.0 70.0 38 3 6.0 76.0 39 3 6.0 82.0 40 3 6.0 88.0, 41 1 2.0 90.0 42 2 4.0 94.0, 43 0 0.0 94.0 44 3 6.0 100.0" 45 0 0.0 100.0:. 46 0 0.0 100.0 >46 0 0.0 100.0' CUMULATIVE PERCENT VS. SPEED (MPH) +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 100 ***10 90 ** 90 80 * 80 ** 7 70 0 * 60 60 50 * 50 40 ** 40 30 * 30 20 20 10 * 10 0*************************** 0 +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 0 10 20 30 40 PERCENT VS. SPEED (MPH) +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ 15 10 5 -------------------------------- ---+----+----+ 0 10 20 30 40 15 10 5 6 } 5;-"05;-"2Ti0 15:02 76034-9915 DRM P"A'GE i=t i't=tom (Tra ditio n April L2, 2003 Mr. and Nrrs. Philip Branson 1051 Oxford Way La Canada, CA 91011 Re: 53600 Del Gato Drive Dear Mr. and 1Ars. Branson, The Tradition Architectural Committee has reviewed correspondent. from your architect regarding the height restrictions for your lot iinpose-d by the City of La Quints;. The Tradition Architectural Committee approves the heights as shown on your plat s. The Tradition Architectural Committee supports your variance application to the City of La Quinta for the heightof your home. We look forward to workiDg; with you :further on the development of your plans - Sincerely, The Tradition Architectural Committee Tradition Community Association cc: Andre Weber City of La Quiuta p EQUVED Kp-t i��0 5 2�3 ''p C0AlUT 19YDREUULOPMENT P DEPARTMENT DESERT RESORT MANAGEMENT POST OFFICE. BOX 4772 - PALM DESERT, CAUFORNIA 92261.4772 73-550 ALESSANDRO, SUITE 5 • PALM DFSERT, CALIFORNIKA 92260 PHONE (760) 346.1161 • Fax (760) 346-9918 05-05-03 15:04 RECEIVED FROM:7603469918 P.02 ANDRZEJ W. WEBER D 74 .133 EL PAS EO, SUIT E A EMU.-, :;;n:,_.: rx=. :;,::•:=inn:.:;:::::: -r::.:.-_—*Si:�::.::� :::=x ::aar's_»3-_::=`;, :.:%_iie' .PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260—` _ :; Wit:>_i -:= _ :::.:....... PHONE 760.340.3002 L-:_....___, _.'y �:v� l�_-� �:. l%:'�:ii? e:�:::. f'_S. STi _-_ .tom _ �ii=:._:±!_._�i E�-�� D F A X 760.340.9502 s.__'' £::y—::: - -__ DATE: 16 April 2003 TO: Community Development Department City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253 FROM: ANDRZEJ W. WEBER LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL, RE: Mr. & Mrs. Philip Branson Proposed Residence 53600 Del Gato Drive, La Quinta, California Gentlemen, While designing the Residence for Mr. & Mrs. Philip Branson on lot #103.on Del Gato Drive in Tradition Community the project team was not aware of the additional height limit restriction that was imposed by the City of La Quinta on every lot on the Del Gato Drive adjacent to the Avenida Bermudas. It requires adjustment of the height limit from 22 feet elsewhere to 17 feet within 150 feet east from the Avenida Bermudas right-of- way. The condition was brought to our attention by City of La Quinta Building Department during the plan check process. As it turned out the main body of the planned residence within the affected part of the lot, confirms to the height restriction with the. exception of two towers. The tower closer to the street falls 100% within the lowered height area with the footprint of 9-6 * 9-6 feet (90 sq.ft.) and roof at the ridge reaching 19'-2" above the approved pad elevation. The second tower, the entry, roughly 75% within the lowered height area, with the footprint of 15-9 * 15-9 feet (90 sq.ft.) and roof at the ridge reaching 22'-0" above the approved pad elevation. The survey shows that the top of the curb of Del Gato Drive at the lot 103 (151.21 feet) is over ten (1.0) feet below the Avenida Bermudas top of curb (161.64 feet at the lowest point), thus restricting the visual impact height adjustment variance, if granted, would have on the view lines of homes on the west side of the Avenida Bermudas. The proposed residence highest roof point (the entry tower) would be than well below the 17 feet limit when viewed from the Avenida Bermudas, as shown on the attached graphic exhibit prepared by my office and based on the civil engineer's field measurements. Sincerely, drzej W. Weber Architect AIA for Mr. & Mrs. Phil Branson �- I AP" 200 !J Apr- 16-03 07 : 54 Andrjftj Weber Arch i t Mt 76000 9502 P.02 PAGE 07/03 Tradition March. 10, 2003 Mr. and Mrs. Philip Branson 1051 Oxford Way . I,a Cwiada, CA 91011 t . Re: 53600 Del Gato Drive Dear Mr. and Mrs. Branson, a E'CEIV D APR. 2 1 UU=3 COMMUNITY T VELOINTPMENT DEPARTMENT The Tradition Architeceural Committee has reviewed your submittal of consaraction documents for your home on Del Gato Drive. "the plans could not be approved as submitted. The following were the committee comments on the plans: l- The submittal was incomplete. FiuI4 grading =d landscape plans were not submitted with the conlstruction drawings. Provide specific detailin.; for typical exterior conditions rather thane just typical dctaih that do nor. apply. Please refiercnoe details to typical conditions and vice versa. 2. The side yard walls at the rear of the property must stop a< 30' setback line and must return to the building wherc 15' or less from the building. 3. The front driveway back up space in front of the garage doors is only 24' back up distance. It is recommended that you have'a minimum back up (stance of 4. Adjacci t properties must be shown per the Guidelincs. 5. Site, wall and haidscape details must be provided per the Cruidelinvi. 6. Screening is required for the windows at the garage facing the strter_ This will prevent viewing into the garage at night when the lights are on. 7. On the exterior elevations, key dote #4, please provide detail for nay tal screening and reference to cWmneys on elevations. 8. Provide detail refcrcnces for typical details on the exterior elevations, such as cave, rakc/gaible, wainscot, column and corbel and hcader details. -'lust using key notes will not comply. Appropriate detail crass referencing wi:l need to be provided 9. The window dctails as shown on the exterior elevations show a sib scant recessed detail at the jambAwad/sill conditions. The details provided for these conditions do not reflect this. Please provide details that reflect the recessed dcsign as shown. Ca_ On the roof plan, provide typical details for such conditions as eave, hip and exposed beam details. DESERT RESORT MAN'AG tNT P06r OFFICE BOX 4?72 • PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92261.4772 73.550 ALESSANDRO, STATE 5 • PALm T)EsERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 PHONE (760) 346.1161 • PAX (760) 346.9918 Apr- 16_ 03 ' 07` 55� Andy Weber Architect 760 0 9502 P.03 �• �� urcM PAGF 03/83 11. provide typical details fox HVAC and WII class B flue screening. Provide architectural details, not framing details. 12. Please provide details for Sat x0ofparapWoornice details. 13. On the electrical plan, provide manufacturing cut sheets and/or desi ,n sketches for allsurface•mounted exterior light fixtures., 14. The dryer vent must be removed from the front elevation. Please revise and resubmit your plans incorporating th= comments. "Gunk v )u for your submittal and patience in our review of the plans. We look forward to working with you further on the developmernt of your home. Sincerely, The Tradition Architectural Con nnittoe Tradition Community Association cc: Andre Welirs May 09 03 09:46a P'L and SUE BRANSON 8182 7613 I r Z • �(�i�7s oul� ,r.LX p.l e7 05-09-03 08:48 RECEIVED FROM:818 952 7613 P•01 30a4 ,' 1 P.O. BOX 1504 Building S 3- 0/0 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO Address LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 Owner Own LP b .4 S. leer.) 6> Mailing I Address City I Zip ITel. Address/ ( A 5 C 1 C_ Zip State Lic. I City & Classif. Lic. # Arch., Engr.,.'n rg�D�esigner AQW&E- 0dress A OE -PR; v , i� p K—� Tel. -t ip beid `? 7 Z 60I Lic.t# C?_6 C" LICENS CONTRACTOR'S DECLARATION that I am IIcen tl under provisions of Chapter 9 (commencingy+Ith Section 3 of th9_B s and Professions Code, arLdryyyter%G" i9ftll force aqd OWNER -BUILDER DECLARATION / I hereby affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason: (Sec. 7031.5,Business and Professions Code: Any city or county which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish, or repair any structure, prior to'its issuance also requires the applicant tot such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law, Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, or that. he is exempt therefrom, and the basis tot the alleged exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by 'any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500). I! I. as owner of the property, or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work, and the structure is not intended or offered for sale. (Sec. 7044. Bussness and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner -builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.) I ; I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to con- struct the project. (Sec. 7044. Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who contracts for such projects with a contractor(s) licensed pursuant'to the Contractor's License Law.) I'-! 1 am exempt under Sec. B. 8 P.C. for this reason Date Owner WORKERS' COMPENSATION DECLARATION I hereby affirm that I have a certificate of consent to self -insure, or a certificate of Worker's Compensation Insurance, or a certified copy thereof. (Sec. 3800. Labor Code.) Policy No. Company (l Copy is filed with the city. ❑ Certified copy is hereby furnished. CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE (This section need not be completed it the permit is for one hundred dollars ($100) valuation or less.) I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. Date_ Owner NOTICE TO APPLICANT: It, after making this Certificate of Exemption you should become subject to the Workers' Compensation provisions of the Labor Code, you must forthwith comply with such provisions or this permit shall be deemed revoked. CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued. (Sec. 3097, Civil Code.) Lender's Name Lenders Address_ This is a building permit when properly lilled out, signed and validated, and is subject to expiration if work thereunder is suspended for 180 days. I certify that I have read this application and state that the above information is correct. I agree to comply with all city and county ordinances and state laws relating to building construction, and hereby authorize representatives -of this city to enter the above - mentioned property for inspection purposes. Signature of applicant Date Mailing Address City, State, Zip APPLICATION ONLY LDING: TYPEE-CONST. ` OCC. GRP. 7 .Number L o-"' _S70"^��Looq%^�'��7J al Description Cam- jercctt Description Sr ) Sq. Ft 13S+ Size No. No. Dw. Stories Units New Add ❑ Alter ❑ Repair ❑ Demolition ❑ Estimated Valuation PERMIT AMOUNT Plan Chk. Dep. �Oa Plan Chk. Bal. Const. Mech. Electrical Plumbing S.M.I. Grading Driveway Enc. Infrastructure TOTAL REMARKS VN ,\ ZONE: BY: Minimum Setback Distances: Front SeI a k from•Center Lime Rear Setb�a Vrom Re�arX rgp. Line - Side Stree S't ack' Qom Center --Line .- Side Setbac To Prope y Lyn i, ` , v� FINAL DATE ----INSPECT,. Issued by: Date Permit Validated by: Validation: WHITE = BUILDING DEPARTMENT YELLOW = APPLICANT PINK = FINANCE t= i of La Quinta, Building & Safety Department RESIDENTIAL PLAN CHECK CORRECTION LIST (os) DATE: March.26,'2003� STATUS: First Review PLAN CHECKED BY: Burt Hanada TELEPHONE NUMBER: (760) 777-7023 ADDRESS: 53-600 Del Gato Drive DESCRIPTION: 4354 sq.ft. SFD APPLICANT: ANDRZEJ W. WEBER PLAN CHECK #: 0302-219 This submittal has been checked for compliance with the 2001 California Building, Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Codes (CBC, CMC, CEC, and CPC, respectively), the 2001 California Energy Code and the City of La Quinta Municipal Code. APPLICANT: BUILDING DEPARTMENT STAFF:. The following items are being returned to you for DO' NOT accept any resubmittal unless ALL of the correction: following items are included: 2 Sets — Redlined Plans 2 Sets — Redlined Plans 2 Sets — Structural Calculations 2 Sets — Revised Plans 2 Sets — Energy Calculations 2 Sets — Structural Calculations This Correction List 2 Sets — Revised Structural Calculations 2 Sets — Truss Calculations 1 Truss Acceptance Letter from Engineer of Record 2 Sets — Energy Calculations This Correction List with Written Responses INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: l ) Provide a written response to each comment on the following pages, noting specifically where the correction can be found. Responses such as, "Sheet A-3," or, "Handrails shall be per CBC Section 1003," are not acceptable. Show or note specifically how compliance with a code requirement is achieved. Responses such as, "Added note 16 on sheet A-3" are appropriate and will help expedite your back check. 2) Corrections may not be made by handwriting on existing drawings. Revise originals and reprint Plans and/or Calculations as necessary. 3) Return all red -marked Plans and/or Calculations with your resubmittal. 4) Each sheet of resubmitted Plans and/or Calculations shall include the preparer's name and telephone number and shall be wet -signed by the preparer. If the preparer is a licensedarchitect or engineer, all documents prepared by that licensed individual shall also bear his/her stamp as prescribed by California Business and Professions Code 05536. Resubmittals will not be accepted with signatures missing. 5) Return this list, your written responses, and all documents listed above with your.resubmittal. Residential Plan Check Correction List Page 1 of 8 r._ ; i City of La Quinta, BuildingSafety Department ,CTION A - GENERAL Provide the Project Address on the first sheet of Plans. Revise address on cover sheet to 53-600 Del Gato Drive. Provide on each sheet of resubmitted Plans and cover sheet of bound Calculations the preparer'.s name and telephone number and wet -signature. If the preparer is a licensed architect or engineer, all documents prepared by that licensed individual shall also bear his/her stamp as prescribed by California Business and Professions Code 05536. Resubmittals will not be accepted with signatures missing. 3) Note on Plans: "All construction shall comply with the 2001 California Building, Plumbing, Mechanical, Electrical, and Energy Codes and all other local codes and ordinances." Remove notes referencing other Code Sections as redlined on Sheet 15. 4) Note on Plans: "All `or equal' substitutions must be submitted to, and approved by the Building Official prior to installation of the item." 5) Provide a current paper copy of the following ICBO Evaluation Report(s): 6) Provide current ICBO Evaluation Report Numbers for the following item(s): 7) Provide detailed information on the Site Plan noting the location of the 150 foot setback from Avenida Bermudas which restricts residences to a maximum 17 feet height [L.Q. City Council Resolution No. 98-17, 97-028]. SECTION B — PRECISE / SITE PLAN / ZONING 1) Provide a complete Site Plan showing north arrow, property lines and lot dimensions, location of existing curbs (or edge of street paving if no curbs exist), all existing and proposed structures, setback dimensions, utility locations, and (if utilized) location of private sewage disposal system. (CBC § 106.3.3) 2) Show on Site Plan how lot will drain to the Right -of -Way with a minimum slope of 1%. (CBC Appendix §3315.4) 3) Specify on Site Plan the Finish Floor and Pad Elevations. Pad Elevation shall match the Approved Pad Elevation on file with La Quinta Public Works Department. Approved pad Elevation is 154.0. 4) Provide and incorporate into the Plans an engineered Grading Plan showing: a) Grade elevations for all adjacent properties and the street b) Proper drainage of this lot c) All retaining conditions 5) Show on Elevations the height of this structure as measured from finish grade, demonstrating co' liance_wiili LQMC Chapter 9.50. 6) Show roof -mounted equipment as hidden lines on Elevation Drawings and as object (solid) lines in Section Drawings and on Roof Plan. Provide details for screening of equipment in accordance with LQMC §9.60.140.B if parapet wall is not higher than the highest point of the equipment.,` 7) Show the location of automatically illuminated building address numbers, clearly visible from the street or Residential Plan Check Correction List Page 2 of 8 AUj City Council Minutes 19 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENT - None PUBLIC HEARINGS August 18, 1998 1. CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE . DECLARATION - OF' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-360, ENTATIVMACTIVI�AP'2 FOR RECONFIGURATION OF TRACT 28470 TO CREATE AN ADDITIONAL 32 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ALONG DEL GATO DRIVE, MASTERS CIRCLE, CLARET COVE, AND LATROBE LANE WITHIN THE TRADITION CLUB. APPLICANTZ�WlN�f8TER DEVELOPNIENTCDMPAY LLC. Mayor Pena abstained due to a conflict of interest and left the dais. The Mayor Pro Tern declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. Ms. di lorio, Planning Manager, advised that this is a request to reconfigure .existing lots at the Tradition Club to create 32 additional•single=family residential lots, which are in Phases 2, 3, and 4 of Tract 28470. The lot sizes range from 13,904 sq. ft. to 25,506 sq. ft., with widths ranging from 71-154 feet and depths from 155-305 feet. The Kings Alcove. street will be deleted and the affected lots will be double -loaded onto Del Gato Drive. She advised that on July 28, 1998, the Planning Commission recommended approval with a modification that lots along Del Gato Drive have a minimum width of 100 feet, which will create fewer lots than the applicant has requested. . Mike Rowe, 41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 101, Palm Desert, of Winchester Development, representing Tradition Club Associates, advised that they are. in agreement with the proposed conditions. There being no one elsewishing to speak, the Mayor Pro Tern declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. RESOLUTION NO. 98-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR AMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-360, A SUPPLEMENT TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR i J City Council. Minutes c August 18, 1998 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-333 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 28867, TO RECONFIGURE 92 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED WITHIN TRACT MAP 28470, SOUTH OF CLARET COVE AND TALKING ROCK TURN -AND EAST OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS (WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC.) It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to adopt Resolution No: 98-93 as submitted. Motion carried with Council Member Adolph and Mayor Pena ABSENT. RESOLUTION NO. 981-94 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT 28867 TO RECONFIGURE 92 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LOTS FOR A TOTAL OF 124 LOTS, LOCATED WITHIN TRACT MAP 28470, _ SOUTH OF CLARET COVE AND TALKING ROCK TURN AND EAST T. OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS (WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC.) It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to adopt Resolution No. 98-94 as submitted. Motion carried with Council Member. Adolph and Mayor Pena ABSENT. 2. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 28738 — TO SUBDIVIDE 8.27 ACRES INTO 22 SINGLE-FAMILY AND OTHER COMMON LOTS WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF.SOUTHERN HILLS AND WEST OF FUTURE WINGED FOOT,. ABUTTING. THE. JACK NICKLAUS TOURNAMENT GOLF COURSE WITHIN PGA WEST. APPLICANT: KSL LAND CORPORATION.. The Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. Ms. di lorio, Planning Manager, advised that this is a request to subdivide 8.27 acres into 22 single-family lots ranging from 11,562 sq. ft. to 16,586 sq. ft. and other common lots located on the southwest corner of Southern Hills and future Winged Foot, abutting the Jack Nicklaus Tournament Golf Course. The Planning Commission has recommended approval subject to findings and conditions. There being no one else wishing to speak, -the Mayor declared the PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Notice of Deter -mina App*ndtx IN TO: Office of Planning and Reseamb 1400 Tenth Street. Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 .�X County Ckrt County of Riverside . P: 0. Box 431 Riverside, CA 92502 pr vtx i 0 %'c. 0. j,4 vv � e' 9 e e From: (Public Agar ey) Cm OF LA QUINl'a► P. O. Box 1504 tt la Quinta, CA - 92253 Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination Incompliance with.Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. T-ep-66cy-p, Project Title r Doov�,-t. Co, LLG State Clearinghouse Number Lead Agency Area Code/felephone S ension (If submioed to CkwinShouse) Contact Persoo T n (include county) Project Description: . v4d 1� uda� This is io advise that the e->A Lotc�1 I VI+A has approved the above de=ibed project an rmd A&ax7. O"ougsk A4aiq Gil-J0�( , (q�d and this made die. following dewmirntions regarding the above descnbod project COUNTY CLERK I. The projeU Q]wiD�G wtD not) have a signitcant effect on dtG,etivirpMJfEti lCNeg DedarationMtc Determination 2. O An Environmental Impact Report was prepared rot this project pursuant to the provisions of per P.R.t:. 21152 '`POSTED A Negative Dwlaratioe was prepares for ft project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mrtigation measures bW= Owen not) made:a condition of the approval of the project AUG 2 8 1998 4. A'statement of Overrimm C moderations [Own'(Dwas am) adopted for this pojxt Removed: — 5 S. Fmngs�a►ea Owen ratj made pursuant to the Provisions of CFQA. By: County of Riverside. St a of Calitoj 'Rhin is Io certify that the final EUt with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the General Public at: Agency) RIVERSIDE COJtdN r, ,2 t.- -f J/ Kogi wdJ+�' AUG 2 8 1998 Date Date received for filing at OPP, �GARY L. ORSO B. Herman i Project Title/Location Name and address of Project Proponent (include county): Tom►-�a-�i ue_ TvcZ �-b � `d 6 [P-1. , � v �o✓► Gf ��ss►-►�,�iv�`� �i g- 3 � !„)rnc.J�.sfer- t�v�Lo{�v►�Prv� LLB • -for Tr-oeLi�►�►�s G(� Project Description: /2��o►�t �� o� -FrGieb 2c 4-70 Greer-� a vv�ct Y.I wA- 3a ► b red i,C, l s Gi (�ng Del �a-�� rv� , MA� Gt�(� , Ll�t✓P�b CA0 L�-i-leobe L�►.v� , W i b1��11, -b�'�2 Trued-i-��, G lUb' � , Gtiv,� �� G1 � U-� . aimed . G� ►nP.+�d a, �e�v�vri udc� . . Findings of Exemption (attach required findin s): p►'b w i (t Y�5 u. [� IA. AO L,) ad ve� (:n- C;b no • -Ei i Av►cj W i I d I r- �� -�� r l�A !o; %a-b . `ih �s I Ica c�s� 4rkr, ppecb � �{-v'� I��.arq,-bt o�. o� �h �/ r �vl ►v�,�v,-izc l .�wt �Ac�z. Cam► �Id 333�. I�� LE,y�,y�, "�"r� .2`d��o , �l� si% I/ias be�„ti cdJ a cwt-b 14s Igo Ie__ 77 a-�s� w i �l b� cans-brc�� ,,vTIP im S�, rn area _ A"-- ark d�i5t p Tra c� s4-7 J Certification: I hereby certify that the lead agency has. made the above findings of fact and that based upon the initial study and hearing record the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Chiet Planning Official) • Title: axot- V— Lead Agency Date iG 753.5 (5/91) STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT , �` J, 0 J is ;SEP - Receipt # 980560 Lead Agency:' CITY OF LA QUINTA Date: 08/28/1998 County Agency of Filing: RIVERSIDE Document No: 980560 Project Title: rT7r,�,2M88W67z!M�? NCHESTERDF-VFT.-rnT.T.r(PnPTI?AT,)irmnxTt-TTTlDN Project Applicant Name: TRADITION CLUB ASSOCIATES Phone Number.- (760)564-3355. Project Applicant Address: 78-505 OLD AVE.52, LA QUINTA CA 92253 Project Applicant: LOCAL -PUBLIC AGENCY' CHECK APPLICABLE FEES El Environmental Impact Report El Negative Declaration E] Application Fee Water Diversion (State ' Water Resources Control Board Only) El Projects Subject to Certified RegulatoryPrograms County Administration Fee ❑ Project that is exempt from fees (DeMinimis Exemption) Project that is exempt from fees (Notice of Exemption) Toad Received $ 7800 Signature and title of person receiving payment: S.E P PL/ ... Mlli::NT! r � O'FILE COPY RESOLUTION 98-93 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR AMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-360 A SUPPLEMENT TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96- 333 FOR ENTATNE Ti2T` 8867: TO RECONFIGURE 92 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LOTS, LOCATED WITHIN TRACT MAP 28470, SOUTH OF CLARET COVE AND TALKING ROCK TURN, AND EAST OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS AMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-360 WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 18°i day of August, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by Winchester Development Company, LLC., on the Amended Environmental Analysis for Tentative Tract 28867, which would modify Tract 28470 to create. additional residential lots generally located south of Claret Cove and Talking Rock Turn and east of Avenida Bermudas in the Tradition, more particularly described as follows: Lot 95 and a portion of Lot "I" and a portion of that land shown as remainder .on Tract 28470-1, MB 263/76-90, and Lots 8, 9, 10, and 11 of Tract 28470-2, MB 266/57-60. WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended, Resolution No. 83-63, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Amended Environmental Assessment 98-360) and has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case, because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract 28867, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be filed; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28 h day of July, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by ,Winchester Development Company, LLC, on the Environmental Analysis to Tentative Tract 28867 which would modify Tract 28470 to add residential lots, during which a recommendation for certification of the Environmental Assessment was, forwarded to the City Council; and, Resolution 98-93 Page 2 WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did make findings to justify certification of Amended Environmental Assessment 98-360: An Initial Study, Amended Environmental Assessment (Amended EA 98-360) has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (hereinafter "CEQA"), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000, et. Seq.). 2. Tentative Tract 28867 is consistent with the Low Density Residential land use goals and objectives of the La Quinta General Plan, in that they are in keeping with Goal 2-1 to develop low density residential areas with generous areas of open space. 3. The subject site is physically suitable for Tentative Tract 28867 in that the slope and topographic relief of the project site is relatively flat, and the soil type is suitable for residential development. 4. Tentative Tract 28867 is consistent with the development standards of the Low Density Residential (RL) Zoning District, which permits minimum lot sizes of 7,200 square feet, and the proposed minimum lot size for Tentative Tract 28867 will be 13,904 square feet, with a minimum lot width of 100-feet for lots 50 through 68. 5. Proposed Tentative Tract 28867 is not likely to cause public health problems as the project has been reviewed by the Fire Department and the Building & Safety Department for those specific issues. 6. The design of Tentative Tract 28867 will not conflict with existing public easements, as the project has been designed around, and with consideration for, these easements. 7. There is no evidence to show that State mandated school fees will not be adequate to address impacts to school facilities, in that the tentative tract map does not affect the current land use as it would be assessed at time of development, whether or not the project was implemented. 8. Prior to action on the subdivision, the City Council considered all significant adverse environmental' impacts and mitigation measures, and has found that all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts which may be caused by the subdivision have been lessened or avoided to the extent feasible. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council for the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: Ll Resolution 98-93 .Page 3 1 That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings.of the City Council in this case; 2. That it does .hereby certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Assessment for Amended Environmental Assessment 98-360, prepared for Tentative Tract 28867, subject tot he Mitigation Monitoring Plan and the subdivision Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract 2867 on file in the Community Development Department. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, .held on this 181' day of August, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Perkins, Sniff; Mayor Pro Tem Henderson NOES: None ABSENT: Council. Member Adolph, Mayor Pena ABSTAIN None JOHN J: ENA, or City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: �PMpc�LI AP DAWN C. HONEYWELL, City Attorney City of La Quinta,. California COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: 4 w FILE AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: . August 1.8, 1998 CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing on Tentative Tract 28867 to consider the reconfiguration of Tract 28470 to create an additional 32 residential lots along Del Gato Drive, Masters Circle, Claret Cove, and Latrobe Lane within the Tradition Club, Applicant: Winchester Development Company, LLC. RECOMMENDATION: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC. HEARING: COPY -L Adopt City Council Resolution certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Amended Environmental Assessment 98-360. 2. Adopt City Council Resolution approving Tentative Tract Map. 28867, subject to findings and conditions. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Site Background Tract 28470, approved in 1997, allows 242 residential lots within the Tradition Club, a golf resort 'residential community. Tract 28611, approved, in 1997, reduced the size of lots in Phase I thereby creating an additional 12 lots. Parcel Map 28612 added four more residential lots. The total number of approved residential lots is currently 258. Existing within the Tradition Club are the golf course, club house facilities, maintenance building, and the rehabilitated Hacienda del Gato which serves as the Administrative offices for the. development. All infrastructure and grading is completed for Phases 1, 2, and 3, and is partially completed for Phase 4. Approximately six building permits for custom homes have been issued within Phase I. Access to the Tradition Club is at the south terminus of Washington Street (Attachment 1). Project Request Tentative Tract Map 28867 (Attachment 2) proposes to reconfigure 92 lots into 124 lots located south of Claret Cove and Talking Rock Turn. The total acreage involved is 82.56 acres. The proposed lots vary in size from approximately 13,904 square feet to 25,506 square feet, as compared with 19,500 to 28,500 square foot lots approved for Tract 28470. P:\ccrptTT28867Tmd.wpd ib AkJi ti . •tom '_ P oposed�"lot widths range from 71-feet to 154-feet, and depths range from.155-feet to 305-feet; as compared with 130-foot to 150-foot widths and 150 to 190-foot depths approved by Tract 28470. All lots front onto private streets, and all but seven lots back onto the existing golf course. . A single loaded street, Kings Al--ove, has- been deleted, along the south property line. The lot sizes will now be increased and two additional lots added in this area. The lots will now be accessed from Del Gato Drive. Simply, two single loaded streets have been combined as a double loaded street. Public Notice This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 27, 1998. All property owners within 500-feet of the Tradition Club were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the Subdivision Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal Code. As of July 23, 1998, no written comments have been received. Public Agency Review All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the Conditions of Approval for this case. Agency letters are on file in the Community Development Department. Planning Commission Consideration On July 28, 1998, the Planning Commission considered the applicant's request to create an additional 32 lots within the Tradition Club. The .Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend the width of Lots 50 through 68 be increased to a minimum of 100-feet instead of staffs recommendation to eliminate seven lots. This recommendation by the Planning Commission was adopted with the finding that the minimum 100-foot lot widths will mitigate the visual impacts to a level of insignificance. The additional lots proposed within the interior of the project and near the southern end .of the project were recommended for approval. The Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting are included as Attachment 3. Issues Based on the provisions. of the General Plan, Zoning Code, and the Subdivision Ordinance, the following overview of the project is provided: Issue 1 - General Plan and Specific Plan Consistency The City's General Plan designates the subdivision as Low .Density Residential (2-4 dwellings per acre) which allows single family housing (e.g., attached or detached housing units).There have been 258 residential lots approved for the Tradition Club project (TM 002 PAC6ptTT28867Tmd.wpd .1 28470 = 242; PM 28612 = 4; TT 28611 12). The proposed Tentative Tract 28867 would create an additional 32 residential lots for a project total of 290 residential lots, which is less than the 399 single family units that would be allowed by the General Plan given the total acreage density allowance plus hillside density transfer potential. This map proposes lots greater than the 7,200 square feet minimum required by the RL Zoning District. As designed, the proposed single family development of Tentative Tract Map 28867 is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Code. Issue 2 - Tract Design/Improvements Private interior street and residential lots have been designed around the existing golf course fairways. Design standards of the City's General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance have been included into the project's.design. Street and other.infrastructure improvements are completely installed for Phase 3 and partially installed for Phase 4. Impacts associated . with development of the project can be mitigated through adherence to the recommended conditions. . Issue 3 - Health and Safety Necessary infrastructure improvements for this project have been installed for the majority of the Tentative Tract 28867 project area. This includes water, sewer, streets, and other necessary improvements. The health, safety and welfare of residents is ensured based on recommended conditions, and by previous assessment of these issues in Environmental Assessment 96-333, prepared for Tract 28470. Issue 4- Environmental Impacts At the July 28, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting, a finding was made that the minimum 1.00-foot lot widths for proposed Lots 50 through 68 would mitigate the visual impacts, identified in Amended EA 98-360, to a level of insignificance. See Section 3.13 Aesthetics of the EA 98-360 (Page 29) for a detailed discussion of visual impacts. The proposed elimination of Kings Alcove street, located near the southern. boundary of the Tradition Club, will result in double -loading onto Del Gato Drive for a. short distance, but this impact is not anticipated to be significant. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: Options available to the City Council are: 1. Certify Amended EA 98-360 and approve Tentative Tract Map 28867, subject to the attached findings and conditions. 2. Deny certification of Amended EA 98-360 and approval of Tentative Tract Map 28867. 3. Continue the Public Hearing,' and provide staff with direction. P AccrptTT28867Trad.wpd . 003 Her an, Community Development Director (Jer. Ci of La uinta Attachments: 1. Phasing Map for Tract 28470 - Tradition Club 2. TTM 28867 - Large Exhibits (City Council Only) 3. Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting, July 28, 1998 CcrptTT288677rad. 00.4 2 Resolution 98-94 Conditions of Approval - Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition August 18, 1998 ' 52. Prior to recordation of the -final map, the applicant shall provide an alternate or secondary access road to the remote end of Del Gato Drive. The roadway shall be a minimum 20 feet wide and shall be all-weather, hard surface material capable of supporting 40,000 pounds over two axles over the entire,width. 54. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of improvements until expressly relieved of the responsibility by the City. . 55. The applicant shall provide a recommended maintenance booklet for streets, landscaping, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, and/or other improvements to be maintained by the Homeowners' Association (HOA). The booklet shall include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the HOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance. 56. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and. construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes. application for plan checking and permits. *57. The width of Lots 50 through 68 along Del Gato Drive shall be revised to be'a minimum of 100-feet with the total number of lots reduced accordingly, prior to final map approval. R:\PLANNING1Coa Res 98-94.wpd Page 10 of 11 City o� Quinta/ O<Z CITY COUNCIL OF NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE -IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of La Quinta City Council will hold a PUBLIC -HEARING August 18; 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, on the following item: ITEM: AMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ' 98-360 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 28867 APPLICANT: WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT CO., LLC. LOCATION: ALONG DEL GATO DRIVE, MASTERS CIRCLE, CLARET COVE, AND LATROBE LANE, WITHIN THE TRADITION CLUB, SOUTHEAST OF 52ND AVENUE AND AVENIDA BERMUDAS REQUEST: CERTIFICATION OF. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR AMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-360 AND APPROVAL TO RECONFIGURE RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN PHASES 2 AND 3 OF TRACT 28470 TO . CREATE 32 ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL LOTS LEGAL: LOTS 95 AND 96, PORTION OF LOT 94 AND I, PORTION OF REMAINDER OF TRACT 28470-01 The La.Quinta Community Development Department has completed Amended Environmental Assessment 98-360. Based upon this amended assessment, the tentative tract will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been recommended. The La Quinta City Council will consider.the request at the Hearing. Any person may submit written comments on this case to the Community Development Department prior to the Hearing and/or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the project at the time of the Hearing. If you challenge the decision of this case in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues that you or someone else raised either at the Public Hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Community Development Department at, or prior to, the Public Hearing. The proposed file(s) may be viewed by the public Monday .through Friday 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. at the Community Development Department, La Quinta Civic Center, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. The public comment period will continue from the date of this notice through the 'Public Hearing on August 18, 1998. In the City's efforts to comply with the requirements of Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990;.the.Administration requires that any person in need'of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a City public meeting, must inform the City Clerk a minimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. PUBLISH ONCE ON JULY 30, 1998 P:\LESLIE\HNCC TT28867.wpd PH #C FILE' ClPT STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 28, 1998 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-360 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 28867 REQUEST:. RECOMMENDATION FOR CERTIFICATION OF A. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND APPROVAL OF A RECONFIGURATION OF TRACT 28470 TO CREATE AN ADDITIONAL 32 RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATION: ALONG DEL GATO DRIVE, MASTERS CIRCLE, CLARET COVE, AND LATROBE LANE, WITHIN THE TRADITION CLUB, SOUTHEAST OF 52ND AVENUE AND AVENIDA BERMUDAS APPLICANT: WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT CO., LLC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-360 WAS PREPARED FOR PROPOSED TENTATIVE .TRACT 28867 IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS RECOMMENDED THAT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL - IMPACT BE CERTIFIED. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING! . DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR); LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) BACKGROUND: Site Background Tract 28470, approved in 1997, allows 242 residential lots. within the.Tradition Club, a. golf resort residential community. Tract 28611, approved in 1997, reduced the size of lots in Phase I thereby creating an additional 12 lots. Parcel Map 28612 added four more residential lots. The total number of approved residential lots is 258. Existing within the Tradition Club are the golf course, club house facilities, maintenance building, and the rehabilitated Hacienda del Gato which serves as the Administrative offices for the development. All infrastructure and grading is completed for Phases 1, 2, and 3, and is P:\perptTTM 28867Trad.wpd partially completed for Phase 4. Approximately six building permits for custom homes have been issued within Phase I. Access to the Tradition Club is at the south terminus of Washington Street (Attachment 1). Project Request Tentative Tract Map 28867 (Attachment 2) proposes to reconfigure lots located south of Claret Cove and Talking Rock Turn. The total acreage involved is 82.56 acres. The proposed lots vary in size from approximately 13,904 square feet to 25,506 square feet, as compared with 19,500 to 28,500 square foot lots. approved for Tract 28470. Lot widths range from 71-foot to 154-foot wide, and depths range from 155-foot to 305-foot, as compared with 130-foot to 150-foot widths and 150 to 190-foot depths approved by Tract 28470. All lots front onto private streets, and all but 7 lots back onto the existing golf course. A single loaded street, Kings Alcove, has been deleted, located along the south property line. The lot sizes will now be increased and two additional lots added in this area. The lots will now be accessed from Del Gato Drive. Simply, two single loaded streets have been combined as a double'loaded street. Public Notice This map application was advertised in. the Desert Sun newspaper on July 1, 1998. All property.owners within 500-feet of the Tradition Club were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the Subdivision Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal Code. As of July 23, 1998, no written comments have been received. Public Agency Review All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the Conditions of Approval for this case. Agency letters are in the case file. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: Based on the provisions of the General Plan, Zoning Code, and the Subdivision Ordinance, the following overview of the project is provided: Issue 1 - General Plan and Specific Plan Consistency The City's General Plan designates the subdivision as Low Density Residential (2-4 dwellings per acre) which allows single family housing (e.g., attached or detached housing units).There have been 258 residential lots approved for. the Tradition Club project (TM 28470 = 242; PM 28612 = 4; TT 28611 = 12). The proposed Tentative Tract 28867 would create an additional 32 residential lots for a project total of 290 residential lots, which is less than the 399 single family units that would be allowed by the General Plan given the total acreage plus hillside density transfer potential. This map proposes lots greater than the 7,200 square feet minimum required by the RL Zoning District. As designed, the proposed single family development of Tentative Tract Map 28867 is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning Code. u 0 0 P:\perptTTM 28867Trad.wpd G Issue 2 - Tract Design/Improvements Private interior street and residential lots have been designed around the existing golf course fairways. Design standards of the City's General Plan and .Subdivision Ordinance have been included into the project's design. Street and other infrastructure improvements are completely installed for Phase 3 and partially installed for Phase 4. Impacts associated with, development of the project can be mitigated through adherence to the recommended conditions. Issue 3 - Health and Safety All necessary infrastructure improvements for this project have been installed for the majority of the Tentative Tract 28867 project area. This includes water, sewer, streets, and other necessary improvements. The health, safety and welfare of residents is ensured based on recommended conditions, and by previous assessment of these issues in Environmental Assessment 96-333, prepared for Tract 28470. Issue 4- Environmental Impacts The area of concern for aesthetic impacts is that area parallel to Avenida Bermudas, along Del Gato Drive. Proposed Tentative Tract Map 28867 will create an additional nine residential lots along Del Gato Drive, paralleling Avenida Bermudas, by reducing the width of existing lots. Two of these nine lots (between Lots 94 and 105) would be below street grade and still large enough that there would not be a detectable increase in the visual impact to the Coral Reef Mountains. The remaining seven additional lots (between Lots 50 and 68) along Del Gato Drive will be reduced in average width from 136-feet (Tract 28470, Lots 177 through 188) to 88-feet. These additional houses on smaller lots will increase the number of roofs that can have a 35% roof mass between 18 and 24 feet in height (Tradition Club Design Guidelines). This increase in the number of houses combined with the 35% roof massing will create an adverse visual impact of the view to the Coral Reef Mountains. To mitigate the potentially negative impacts to the view of the mountains to the east of Avenida Bermudas, it is recommended that the seven new lots be eliminated between Lots 50 and 68 (Staff recommends that 25 of the 32 requested lots be approved). The proposed additional lots within the interior of the. proposed tentative tract are not anticipated to increase any adverse impact to views due to their distance from Avenida Bermudas. The proposed elimination of Kings Alcove street, located near the southern boundary of the Tradition Club, will result in double -loading onto Del Gato Drive for a short distance, but this impact is not anticipated to be significant. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- , recommending to the City Council Certification of a Mitigated ' Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-360. P:\perptTTM 28867Trad.wpd 0 V V v 2. Adopt. Planning Commission Resolution 98- , recommending to the City Council ter' approval of Tentative Tract Map 28867, subject to findings and conditions. Attachments: 1... Phasing Map for Tract 28470 - Tradition Club 2. TTM 28867 - Large Exhibits (Planning Commission Only) Prepared by: Submitted by: L lie Mouriqua d, Asso late Planner Christine di lorio, Plan ing Manager. UU0 4 PCrptTTM28797RJT Planning Commission Meeting July 28, 1998, 16. Chairman Tyler stated he too was concerned about the word "Restaurant", but noted it was included on the other restaurants and appeared to be a part of their National logo. 17. Commissioner Kirk stated this may be true and it may be larger in other cities, but in La Quinta they are trying to be sensitive to design guidelines, in particular signs, and even though it is a minor deviation, it could be the "tip of the. iceberg", and he would hate to see 'sign proliferation in the City, especially along Highway 111. 18. Commissioner Robbins asked the applicant to respond. Ms. Kerr stated the Ay word "Restaurant" is part of their registered trademark logo and they would like to retain it. Following discussion, it was determined the sign would remain as submitted by the applicant. 19. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated Condition #35 would be modified to substitute some of the turf in the north planter with a desert planting scheme. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None: ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C. Environmental Assessment 98-360 and Tentative Tract Man 28867; a request of Winchester Development 'Company, for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-360 and recommendation for approval of a reconfiguration of Tract 28470 to create an additional 32 residential lots. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff informed the Commission of the modification to Condition #57 and the addition of Condition #58. 2. Commissioner Butler asked if the 17-foot height limitation was for the houses in the south end of the tract. Staff stated it was for those homes that would be parallel to Avenida Bermudas and on Del Gato Drive. Commissioner Robbins asked for clarification on the number of lots being Aj) 3. deleted. Why was staff more concerned about increasing the lots in the lower part and not those in the upper portion of the. tract. Stall stated that with the development and analysis of the entire tract, there would not be the visual C:\My Document-,\WI"DOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 6 :' Planning Commission Meeting. July 28, 1998 impact on the upper lots as there would be on the lower lots. Staff is recommending denial of the reconfiguration for Lots 50 through 68; but approval of Lots 94 through 106. 4. Chairman Tyler asked about the impact of the letter from the Department of Fish and Wildlife Service. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the Fish and Wildlife letter had been received and even though Fish and Wildlife believe the project may have an impact on the sheep in the hills, the City had received no evidence to substantiate their claim. There is no evidence that a change to the lot configuration of a tract within an already graded development would have any impact. 5. Commissioner Abels asked if any sheep had been seen in this area. No comment was made by staff. 6.. Commissioner Butler stated he was concerned about the impact of a fence as. recommended by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated a fence in this area would .be against City regulations if it were to be constructed above the 20% grade. Commissioner Butler asked if it would be possible to ask someone from the Department of Fish and Wildlife to present their argument to the Commission. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that as projects are brought to the City, there will be several opportunities to hear from the Department of Fish and Wildlife. 7. Commissioner Kirk asked if the Department of Fish and Wildlife had reacted to the HUGO Ordinance. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated no information had been received. Commissioner Kirk stated his disappointment with the Department to not provide the Commission with a recommendation for guidance in conjunction with this request. 8. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Mike Rowe, representing the applicant, stated he appreciated working with staff and the Commission on this development. The reason for this request was due to the demand of the real estate market. He then questioned Conditions #21 which requires them to apply for a CLOMAR.. As they were not changing anything on the FEMA maps, he did not believe it applied to this tract, or the project as a whole.. Condition #57, they.were asking to be deleted as they have provided additional setbacks which creates more open space. 9. Chairman Tyler asked if the lots along Del Gato had been .graded for the prior configuration. Mr. Rowe stated the reconfiguration will cause the lots to step down quicker and thus will have to be regraded. CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\pc7-28-98.wpd 7 IV, Planning Commission Meeting July 28, 1998 10. Commissioner Butler stated he too questioned why the project had to meet the requirement for FEMA. Mr. Rowe stated the master drainage program that was constructed within the project was to take care of this. Associate Engineer Fred Bouma stated this is not a new condition, it is a carryover from the original Conditions of Approval. There are retention basins within this development that are Zoned AO on the National. FEMA Map. AO is a designation which is very expensive to obtain insurance for. In order to get a letter of map revision, or the CLOMAR, for your property, once it is classified as being in this zone, you have to prove that your home is not a part of this area which is a long and tedious process. FEMA will not allow the City to make the determination. The property owner must submit an application and then follow the process. The maps that are used to determine whether a property is within the area or not, does not show property lines. It only indicates an area and it is the property owner's responsibility to prove whether or not their property is within the area. The City is conditioning the developer to take care of this process for the future property owners. It is not expensive for the developer when he has a large group of properties for which mapping is already on the computer and surveyors and engineers are available who can make a group, multiple property request for letters of map revision, or at least recognition that these properties are not within the flood zone. Mr. Rowe stated he did not disagree with what staff has stated, but the normal process is for the lender to require it of the property owner. His concern is that it is required prior to pulling a building permit. 11. Commissioner Kirk stated that if this was a condition placed on the original development, and building permits have been issued, is this, condition not being met or what? Associate Engineer Fred Bouma stated it is possible that building permits are being issued without this condition being met. Commissioner Kirk asked if it could be verified that this condition was contained in the original conditions. Discussion followed regarding the conditions. 12. Commissioner Robbins asked for clarification on the word "near existing special flood hazard areas". Staff would look into the matter. 13. Commissioner Kirk stated in regard to staffs recommendation for Lots 50 to 68, the applicant indicated the step down would dramatically reduce the visual impact. At Lot 68, the highest elevation, it. appears it would be the same regardless of what is decided. Lot 50, which is the lowest elevation, would also be the same. Will these lots be graded different so that all lots between 50 and 68 would be dropped some appreciable distance? Mr. Rowe explained the reduction process and what the visual impact would be with the increase/decrease in lots. Discussion followed regarding the elevation change and roof massing which could affect the visual impact. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 8 . 0 • Planning Commission Meeting July 28, 1998 14. Associate Engineer Fred Bouma stated the condition. regarding FEMA was contained in the original conditions for the project and staff would need to offer the applicant an opportunity to satisfy this condition. If the applicant could have the grading plans for all lots near the retention areas viewed by FEMA's consultant and obtain assurance from FEMA that the lots are not contained in the flood zone, it would be less complicated. than the CLOMAR process and would relieve the City of the responsibility for saddling the homeowners with the high flood coverage. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell suggested the condition be changed to read as it was worded in the original approval for the development. "The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. The applicant shall apply for conditional letters of map revision from FEMA for all lots near existing special flood hazard areas within the development as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Prior to issuance of any building permit for these lots, the applicant shall have received relief letters for these lots. Prior to final inspection of homes on the lots, the applicant shall provide FEMA with -the required `as built' information to receive FEMA letters removing the structures from the Special Flood Hazard Area." Staff will see that the condition is met before any further building permits are issued. . 15. Commissioner Robbins .stated he had a problem with this condition because dealing with FEMA is a long drawn out process and depending upon what the City's interpretation of "near" is, the City could delay the project for a number years and he is not sure that is necessary. Associate Engineer Fred Bouma suggested it be amended to apply only to the fronting units. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the original condition applies to the overall project of the entire site and could not be changed during this public hearing. The Commission could reword or delete Condition #21 for this tract, but regardless, the original condition for the entire site will remain in force. 16. There being no other public participation, Chairman Tyler closed the public participation of the public hearing and opened to issue for Commission discussion. 17. Commissioner Kirk stated the. only outstanding issue is staff's recommendation on Lots 50 through 68. He would like to see a cross-section that more accurately depicts what the visual impact would be. 18. Commissioner Butler stated he agreed with Commissioner Kirk. He understands the consumer demand,, but the roof massing does make it confusing asit is hard to envision what will really be built. He asked if staff could provide more information on the massing. Staff stated the applicant could be requested to provide additional information. CAMy Documents\WP1)0CS\pc7-28-98.wpd 9 h Y Planning Commission Meeting July 28, 1998 19. Commissioner Robbins stated he was not convinced that 35% more roof mass with the additional houses, is anymore than 35% roof mass with fewer houses. He questioned Condition #31.B.3. and the width of a cul-de-sac which he thought was too small. Staff stated it meets the Fire Marshal's requirements. Commissioner Robbins asked that Condition #48 be corrected to read "W-33". 20. Chairman Tyler stated his concern about the lots on Avenida Bermudas as they were an issue of great concern to the community. He recommended that . Condition #58 be deleted. He would concur with leaving the lots at their current size as proposed under Condition #57. .21. Commissioner Kirk stated he would be willing to support staffs recommendation, but if the applicant would like to spend time with staff to give a presentation to the Commission that would substantiate his position'. and continue this item, he would like to make this suggestion. Chairman Tyler noted the next Commission meeting would not be until September. Mr. r Rowe asked if there could be a recess to see if this could be resolved with staff at this time. Chairman Tyler recessed at 8:41 p.m. and reconvened at 8:48 p.m. 22. Following the break, staff recommended. that the applicant increase the size of Lots 50 though 68 to 100-foot minimum widths. This will decrease the number of lots by approximately three instead of seven. 23. There being no . further discussion, it was moved. and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- 057 recommending to the City Council Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-360. The findings. were revised to reflect that the Commission believes by requiring the 100-foot lot size .it would adequately mitigate the view corridor concerns. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 24. It was Moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-058, recommending to the City. Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28867, subject to findings and conditions as amended: CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\pc7-28-98.wpd 10 Planning Commission Meeting July 28, 1998 a. Condition #21 would be deleted. b. Condition #48 correct to read "CVWD Standard W-33". C. Condition #57 would be modified to. require Lots 50-68 to have 100- foot widths. d. Condition #58 - added: "For a distance of 150-feet east of the ultimate right-of-way of Avenida Bermudas, single family residences shall be restricted to a maximum of 17-feet in height, excluding any roof projections (chimneys, etc.), which are subject to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for all lots abutting Del Gato and parallel to Avenida Bermudas." . ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. A. Environmental Assessment 98-359 and Conditional Use Permit 98-040; a request of La Quinta Golf Properties for approval of a Specific Plan to allow 28 resort residential lots and a recreation building. with related amenities; and approval of a conditional use permit to allow construction of 28 resort residential units. L . Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted one additional condition to the Specific Plan; Condition #23 be changed to require the maximum building height to be 28-feet instead of 34, and add a condition to state the conditional use permit will not be valid until the Zoning Code update becomes effective. 2. Commissioner Robbins asked if the only place the building would be visible would be from the access road to Lake Cahuilla. Staff stated. that from outside the project, yes. 3. - Commissioner Kirk stated the elevations were one story and if two story was being considered he would like to the elevations .to come back to the Commission, especially if they are going to 34-feet. He questioned why a specific plan application was needed for a relatively small project, and asked if a specific plan was needed for a resort -residential project. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated no, it would only need a conditional use permit and site development permit. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the reason for the specific plan is because the applicant wanted to deviate some. of the zoning standards and in order to do this a specific plan would be required. The deviation is to allow parking spaces instead of parking garages, one space for each bedroom. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 11 w E FILE COPY 2jl� I., RESOLUTION 98-94 A RESOLUTION OF .THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT 28867. TO RECONFIGURE 92 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LOTS FOR A TOTAL OF 124 LOTS, LOCATED WITHIN TRACT MAP 28470, SOUTH OF CLARET COVE AND TALKING ROCK TURN, AND EAST OF AVENIDA BERMUDAS TENTATIVE TRACT 28867 WINCHESTER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 181`' day of August, 1998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by Winchester Development Company, LLC., on proposed Tentative Tract 28867, generally located south of Claret Cove and Talking Rock Turn and east of Avenida Bermudas, more particularly described as follows: Lot ,95 and a portion of Lot "I" and a portion of that land shown as Remainder on Tract 28470-1, MB 263/76-90, and Lots 8, 9, 10, and 11 of Tract 28470-2, MB 266/57-60.. WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended, Resolution 83-63, in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Amended Environmental Assessment 98-360) and has determined that although. the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact. on .the environment, there would not be a significant effect, in this case, because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract 28867, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be filed;. and, WHEREAS, the .Planning Commission of the City. of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28T" day of July, 1.998, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing as requested by Winchester Development Company, LLC, on proposed Tentative Tract 28867, generally .located south Claret Cove and Talking Rock Turn and east of Avenida Bermudas, during which a recommendation for approval of Tentative Tract 28867 was forwarded to the City Council; and, WHEREAS, at,said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering- all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did make findings to justify the approval of Tentative Tract 28867: RAPLANNING\Res 98-94.wpd Resolution 98-94 Page 2 1. Tentative Tract 28867 is consistent with the Low Density Residential land use goals and objectives of the La Quinta General Plan, in that they are in keeping with Goal 2-1 to develop low density residential areas with generous areas of open space. 2. The subject site is physically suitable for Tentative Tract 28867 in that the slope . and topographic relief of the project site is relatively flat, and the soil type is suitable for residential development. 3. Tentative Tract 28867 is consistent with the development standards of the Low Density Residential (RL) Zoning District, which permits minimum lot sizes of 7,200 square feet, and the proposed minimum lot size for Tentative Tract 28867 will be 13,904 square feet, with a minimum lot width of 100-feet for Lots 50 through 68. 4. Proposed Tentative Tract 28867 is not likely to cause public health problems as the project has been reviewed by the Fire Department and the Building & Safety Department for those specific issues. 5. The design of Tentative Tract 28867 will not conflict with existing public easements, as the project has been designed around, and with consideration for, these easements. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council for the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of the City Council in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve Tentative Tract 28867 subject to the subdivision Conditions of Approval attached hereto 'and on file in the Community Development Department. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 18`h day of August, 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Perkins', Sniff, Mayor Pro Tern Henderson NOES: None ABSENT: Council Member Adolph, Mayor Pena ABSTAIN: None 1 Resolution 98-94 Page 3 JOHN J. PENA, MaVor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: 4AUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM.- 0. zz,��jj DAWN C. HONEYWEL , City Attorney City of La Quinta, California RAPI ANNING\Res 98-94.wpd RESOLUTION 98-94 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL TENTATIVE TRACT 28867 - TRADITION AUGUST 18, 1998 * Modified during Planning Commission Meeting of July 28, 1998. GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 2. The applicant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. The City of La Quinta shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel 3: Tentative Tract Map 28867 shall comply with. the requirements and standards of § § 66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC). 4: Prior, to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District ' • .Coachella Valley Water District • Imperial ' Irrigation District • California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of. said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The, applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan for review by the. Public Works. Department. R:\PLANNING\Coa Res 98-94.wpd Page 1 of 11 Resolution 98-94 Conditions of Approval - Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition August 18, 1998 INIONWIVAUNEW 5. All easements, rights of way and other property rights required of the tentative map or easements which will diminish access rights otherwise necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the development and functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the process of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or a waiver of parcel map. Conferrals shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for emergency vehicles and for access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of essential improvements located on street, drainage or common lots or within utility easements. 6. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties. 7. The applicant shall dedicate public and private street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. 8. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. 9. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins and common areas. 10. As part of the filing package for final map approval, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu choices so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions including approved revisions to the plans. If the map was not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files. 1 Resolution 98-94 Conditions of Approval - Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition August 18, 1998 . IMPROVEMENT PLANS 11. Improvement plans submitted to the. City for plan, checking shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media' in the categories of "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." Grading, street and drainage -plans shall be prepared by professional engineers registered to . practice in California. Landscaping plans shall be prepared by licensed landscape architects. All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. ` "Streets and Drainage" plans shall norrrially include signals, sidewalks; bike .paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, ' irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved. by the City Engineer. 12.. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or.construction notes for elements of construction. For a .fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 13. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, required by the City prior to agendization of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided shall remain in effect until explicitly waived, reduced or released by the City regardless of the passage of time, changes to or expiration of the improvement agreement or failure. of the secured party to make .premium. payments or fulfill other obligations to the surety. Reductions and releases of security shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. 14. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates .shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer.. R:\PLANNING\Coa Res 98-94.wpd Page 3 of 11 Resolution 98-94 Conditions of Approval - Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition August 18, 1998 Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 15. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the Conditions of Approval and secure those phases separately, a phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations. as set forth in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a construction sequencing plan for that phase is approved by the City Engineer. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely manner or as specified in an approved phasing` plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, completion of final inspections on buildings, or otherwise withhold approvals related to the development of this project until the applicant makes satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made other arrangements satisfactory to the City. 16. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements and development -wide improvements (ie: retention basins, perimeter. walls & landscaping, gates, etc.) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 17. This tentative map shall remain subject to existing reimbursement agreements and participatory improvement requirements associated with the underlying tentative map. 18. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by§ the Community Development and Public Works Departments. [l Resolution 98-94 Conditions of Approval Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition August 18, 1998 19. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall obtain a Fugitive Dust Control permit in accordance with Chapter .6.16, LQMC. The application for the permit shall include a Fugitive Dust Control Plan and security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an. amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the" provisions of the permit. 20. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 21. The applicant shall conduct a thorough preliminary geological and soils engineering investigation and shall submit the report of the investigation ("the soils report") with the grading plan. 22. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a grading plan meeting the approval of the City Engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of this. development, that a. soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 23. The applicant shall obtain approval of the grading plan from CVWD. 24. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation .at the interface of this development with abutting properties and of separate tracts and lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more � than three feet except for lots within a tract, but not sharing common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If compliance with this requirement is impractical, the City will consider. and may approve alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 25. Prior to.issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad elevation certifications which are stamped and signed by a California registered civil engineer or surveyor. The document shall list, by lot number, the pad elevation(s) approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation(s), and the difference between the two, if any. RAPLANNING\Coa Res 98-94.wpd Page 5 of 11 Resolution 98-94 Conditions of Approval - Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition August 18, 1998 W:A 26. Drainage shall comply with the approved hydrology and drainage plans for Tract 28470 unless the applicant submits revised plans for checking and approval by the City Engineer. 27. All existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 28. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior' to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. 29. The .City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for any waived final map, the development or portions thereof may be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street and traffic improvements required herein. 30. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS This property shall remain subject to the off -site street requirements of underlying Tract 28470 and agreements made pursuant thereto. B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CULS DE SAC 1) Primary circulation streets - 36' wide 1 Resolution 98-94. Conditions of Approval - Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition August 18, 1998 2) Residential - 36 feet wide if double loaded (buildings on both sides), 32 feet if single Loaded 3) Cul de sac curb radius - 38' " Features contained in the approved construction plans may warrant additional street widths or. other improvements as determined by the City Engineer. 31. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall conform with the approved access plan for Map 28470. 32. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, .channelization markings, • raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in .design and location by the U.S.- Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 33. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond subdivision boundaries such as; but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions,' or other incidental . work which will ensure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the City's standards and practices. 34. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in. accordance with the LQMC, adopted standard and supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. 35. Street right of way geometry for cul-de-sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 36. All streets proposed to serve residential, or other access driveways shall be designed and constructed with vertical curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas and to facilitate street sweeping. 37. Street pavement sections shall be designed using the Caltrans procedure for a 20-year life and . shall consider site -specific data including soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including, construction and home building .activity). The minimum structural section for A.C. pavement shall be 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. (residential) and 4.0"/5.00" (collector). RAPIANNINMCoa Res 98-94.wpd Page 7 of 11 Resolution 98-94 Conditions of Approval - Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition August 18, 1998 The applicant shall submit current (no more than two years old) mix designs for base materials, Portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, including complete mix design lab results, for review and approval by the City. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (no more than six months old at the time proposed for construction) aggregate gradation test results to confirm that the mix design gradations can be reproduced in production of the base or paving material. Construction operations shall not be scheduled until mix designs are approved. 38. Final inspection and occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the development will not be approved until the homes or permanent buildings have improved access, including street improvements, traffic control devices and street name signs, to publicly -maintained streets, and have restored the curbing at any unused curb cuts along the property's street frontage. If on -site streets are initially constructed with only a portion of the full thickness of pavement, the applicant shall complete the pavement when directed by the City but in any case prior to final inspections of any of the final ten percent of homes within the tract (see provisions of above condition on street pavement sections). LANDSCAPING AND WALLS 39. This tentative map shall remain subject to the off -site landscaping and wall requirements of Tract 24870. 40. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared for landscaped lots, common areas and retention basins. The plans shall be submitted to. the Public Works Department for plan checking. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved by the Community Development Department and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. 41. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. 42. The applicant shall ensure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. QUALITY ASSURANCE 43. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. • Resolution 98-94 Conditions of Approval Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition . August 18, 1998 . .1 44. The subdivider shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing not included in the City's permit inspection program but' -which are required by the City to provide evidence, that materials and their placement comply with plans and specifications. 45. The applicant shall utilize qualified California -registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or land surveyors, as appropriate, to provide, or have their agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 46. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words -"Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor. The applicant shall submit revised computer files of the improvements as constructed. *47. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD Standard W-33 shall be located at each.. street intersection spaced 'not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than -165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire . flow shall be 1000 gpm for a two hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of streets directly in line with fire hydrants. 48. Applicant/developer will provide written certification from the appropriate water . company that the required fire hydrant(s) are either existing or that financial arrangements have been .made to .provide them. 49. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer will furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review/approval. Plans will conform to the fire hydrant types, location and 'spacing, and the system will meet the fire flow requirements. Plans will be signed/approved by. a registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 50. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 51. 'A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire Department for .review prior to issuance of building permits. Resolution 98-94 Conditions of Approval - Final Tentative Tract 28867-Tradition August 18, 1998 52. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant shall provide an alternate or secondary access road to the remote end of Del Gato Drive. The roadway' shall be a minimum 20 feet wide and shall be all-weather, hard surface material capable of supporting 40,000 pounds over two axles over the entire width. 54. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of improvements until expressly relieved of the responsibility by the City. 55. The applicant shall provide a recommended maintenance booklet for streets, landscaping, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, and/or other improvements to be maintained by the Homeowners' Association (HOA). The booklet shall include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the HOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance. 56. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction in Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. *57. The width of Lots 50 through 68 along Del Gato Drive shall be revised to be a minimum of 100-feet with the total number of lots reduced accordingly, prior to final map approval. Appendix I Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: AMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98- 360 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 28867 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1506, La Quinta, CA 92253 3: Contact Person and Phone Number.: Leslie Mouriquand - (760)777-7125 4. Project Location: Del Gato Drive, Masters Circle, Claret Cove, and Latrobe Lane, within the Tradition Club southeast of 52nd Avenue and Avenida Bermudas 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Winchester Development Company, LLC . 41865 Boardwalk, Suite.101 Palm Desert, CA 92211 6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential 7. Zoning: LDR 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but'not limited to later phases . of the project and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Reconfiguration of Phases 3 and 4 of Tract 28470 to create an additional 32 residential lots 9: Surrounding Lane Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. The project is surrounded on the west and north by residential uses. To the south and east is open space. 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None identified. NEAckl ist-98.360.wpd -1= 00-1306 008 Environmental Facto entially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project modification, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Population and Housing Geological Problems Water X Air Quality Determination Transportation/Circulation Biological Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Hazards Noise Mandatory Finds of Significance Public Services Utilities and Service Systems Aesthetics Cultural Resources Recreation (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 modification could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant"effect(s) on the environment, but at least 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, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated.". 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, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects .(a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (be) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. July 28. 1998 Sature Date LESLIE MOURIOUAND The City of La Ouinta Printed Name For 000397 .2- 009 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1} A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources .a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information. sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on - .site,. cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated 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). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references -to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, .zoning ordinances). .Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is.substantiated. See the sample question below. - A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 7) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different' ones. PAEAckl ist-98-360.wpd 000398 -3- 010 Sample question: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Significant Unless` Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact • Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving. Landslides or mudslides? (1,6) (Attached source list explains that 1 is the general plan, and 6 is�a USGS topo map. This answer would probably not need further explanation.) I. LAND. USE.AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation of zoning? (Source#(s): b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) }{ c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) X d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? ( ) X e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established. community (including a low-income or minority community)? ( ) }t II. POPULATION AND. HOUSING. Would the proposal: . a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) X . b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g.' through projects in an undeveloped area or extension or major infrastructure)? ( ) }( c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) X III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? 000399 MEAcklist-98-360.wpd U 11 —4_ IV. Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( ) e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) h) Expansive soils? (_ ) s i) Unique geologic or physical features? WATER. Would the proposal result in: Potentially Potentially Significant Less Thal Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact LMMM Lm�mO MMm a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) X b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such. as flooding? ( ) c) Discharge into surface'waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? ( ) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( ) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? PAEAcklist-98-360.wpd _ 000400 012 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Signifcant unlen Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact • Impact f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge .. X capability? ( ) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) X V. AIR QUALITY Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or , projected air quality violation? (. ) X b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) X c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change mi climate? ( ) X d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) X VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a). Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (. ) X b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses.(e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) . X c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) X d) Insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? ( ) X 000401 -6- ` f! 1 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact _�® f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) X g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( ) X BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,. animals, and birds)? ( ) b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal habitat; etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( ) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) VM. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) lm�m= _ago M®_®i b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? )( c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? 0004r12 P:\EAcklist-98-360.wpd 014 Potentially Potentially Significant Legs Than Significant Unless Significant No Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact IX. ' " HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances , (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? X b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) X c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) X d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? 1.7 X� e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees?. X X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (. ) XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need -for new or altered government •services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) b) Police protection? ( ) c) Schools? ( ) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? { ) e) Other governmental services? (. ) X X X 000403 01u- • Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) b) Communications systems? ( ) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) e) Storm water drainage? ( ). f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?. ( ) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? (. ) c) Create light or glare? (. . ) XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) b) Disturb archaeological resources? { ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact PAEAcklist-98-360.wpd . 000404 0.16 -9- • Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): c) Affect historical resources? .( ) d).Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) X XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) X b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) _ X XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the.project have the potential to degrade the quality.of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife' species, cause a fish or wildlife population. to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare to endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples.of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short -tern, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? X c) Does the project have. impacts that are individually. limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects; the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) 1 r X d) Does the project have environmental effects which will.cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directory or indirectly? X PAEAck1ist-98-360:wpd _10- �1 n � 41 5 017 XVII. EARLIER ANALYSIS'. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a).Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis 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 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. INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM, FOR AMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-360 Supplemental to Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 96-333 Tradition Project: Tentative tract Map 28867 &A lid cant; Winchester Development Company, LLC 78-150 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Pre r by City. of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253. July 21, 1998 000407 019 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ 3 1.1 Project Overview ..................................................... 3 1.2 Purpose of Initial Study ............................................:.. 3 1:3 Background of Environmental Review ...... .............................. 3 1.4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review ................. . 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............... 4 2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting ............................... 4 2.2 Physical Characteristics :........ 4 2.3 Operational Characteristics ........................................ 4 2.4 Objectives........................................................ 4 2.5 Discretionary Actions .....................................:.......... 4 2.6 Related Projects ................................................... 5 3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ....... 5 3.1 Land Use and Planning ........................................:...... 5 .3.2 Population and Housing ......:...................................:... 7 3.3 Earth Resources ................................................... 18 3.4 Water'......................:......:............................. 11 3.5 Air Quality ...................................................... 15 3.6 Transportation/Circulation...:....................................... 17 3.7 Biological Resources ................... ......:.......................... 3.8 Energy and Mineral Resources ........................................ 21 3.9 Hazards.....................................................:... 22 3.10 Noise.....::....................................:.............. 23 3.11 Public Services ....................................... ............. 24 3.12 Utilities......................................................... 26 3.13 Aesthetics....................................................... 29 3.14 Cultural Resources ... ...................... .:......................... 30 3.15 Recreation........................................................ 31 4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .......................... 32 5 EARLIER ANALYSIS . .. .. 33 0004.8 2 fl 2 0 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Tentative Tract Map 28867 which would modify. Tract 28470 Phases 3 and 4 in order to create an additional 32 residential lots within the Tradition Club. On April 1, 1997, the City Council approved Resolution 97-26, certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 96-333. Environmental Assessment 96-333 assessed the impacts of Tract 28470 as originally proposed. This environmental assessment examines the . impacts associated with the proposed additional 32 lots. The Environmental Assessment was released for public review on July 24, 1998. At the Planning Commission meeting of July 28, 1998, there was a substitution of mitigation relating to aesthetic impacts. This Environmental Assessment has been amended to reflect the mitigation as recommended by the Planning Commission. The substituted mitigation is outlined in Section 3.13 Aesthetics. 1.2 PURPOSE OF INITIAL STUDY As part of the environmental review for the proposed modification of Tract 28470, the City of La. Quinta Community Development Department staff has prepared this Initial Study. This document provides a basis for determining the nature and scope of the subsequent environmental review for the proposed subdivision. The purposes of the Initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, include the following: To provide the Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the tentative tract map; To enable the applicant, or the City of La Quinta, to modify the project, mitigating adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; To assist the preparation of an EIR, should one be required, by focusing the analysis on those issues that will be adversely impacted by the proposed subdivision; To facilitate environmental review early in the design of the subdivision, To provide documentation for the findings in a Mitigated Negative Declaration that the proposed subdivision.will not have a significant effect on the environment; To eliminate unnecessary EIR's; and, To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. 000400 C121 1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed tentative tract ' application was deemed subject to the environmental review requirements of CEQA. This Initial Study Checklist and Addendum was prepared for review and recommendation by the City of La Quinta Planning Commission and certification by the City Council. 1.4 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This Initial Study indicates there is a potential for adverse environmental impacts to aesthetics issues contained in the Environmental Checklist after mitigation. The degree of this adverse impact is not significant. As a result, a subsequent Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project modification. SECTION 2• PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The City of La Quinta is a 31.18 square mile municipality located in the southwestern portion of the Coachella Valley,. in Riverside County; California. The'City is bounded on the west by the City of Indian Wells, on the east by the City of Indio and Riverside County, on the north by Riverside County, and federal lands to the south. The City of La Quinta was incorporated in' 1982. The specific location of Tentative Tract 28867 is in the central and southern portions of the Tradition Club development, Phases 3 and 4 of Tract 28470. The Tradition project is bounded on the west by Avenida Bermudas; on the north Avenue 52, on the east and south by the Coral Reef hillsides. 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The. proposed subdivision is a request to modify Tract 28470 to reduce the size of existing residential lots to create 32 additional residential lots. The lots and streets created by TT 28470 are graded and are ready for development. Proposed TTM 28867 would reconfigure the existing lots into smaller lots with sizes ranging from 13,904 square feet to 25,506 square feet. 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposed tentative tract would allow for more lots on which to build more custom houses. The lots are within a private gated community. 2.4 OBJECTIVES The objective of the proposed tentative tract is to increase the number of lots available for sale . within the Tradition Club. 2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS 4 000410 022 The following discretionary approvals will be required for this project: Certification of the Environmental Assessment 98-360; and, . Approval of Tentative Tract Map 28867, 2.6 RELATED PROJECTS The proposed tentative tract map is related to the previously approved Tract 28470, in that the proposed subdivision is a reconfiguration of Phases 3 and 4 of TTM 28470. SECTION 3• ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed addition of the 32 lots. The CEQA Checklist issue areas are evaluated in this addendum. For each checklist item, the environmental setting is discussed, including a description of the existing conditions within the City and the areas affected by the proposed subdivision. Thresholds of significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies, or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G). 3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, -in the eastern portion of Riverside County. The valley. is abundant with both desert plant and animal life..The topographicalrelief ranges from -237 feet below mean sea level (msl) to about 2,000 feet above msl. The valley is a part of the Colorado. Desert region. Surrounding the valley are the San Jacinto Mountains, the Santa Rosa Mountains, the Orocopia Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountains. The San Andreas fault transects the northeastern edge of the valley. Local Environmental Setting Tract 28470 is located at the southern terminus of Washington Street, south of Avenue 52, east of Avenida Bermudas. The land is partially developed with a -golf course, flood control facilities, club house, maintenance building, cart barn, and new custom homes. Proposed Tentative Tract 28867 is located in the southern portion of Tract 28470. A. Would the project modification conflict with the general plan designation or zoning? No Impact. In 1996, through a city-wide Zoning Ordinance Update, the R-2 designation was reclassified as RL (Low Density Residential District), and the HC to.Open Space'(OS). That area included in the flood and drainage facilities on -site is designated as .FP (Flood Plain District) on the City's Zoning Map, and W (Watercourse) on the General Plan. The portion of the project that is subject to the requested subdivision is zoned RL and designated as Low Density Residential on the General Plan Land Use Diagram. 000411 5 0o23 Adjacent land uses and their designations surrounding the Tradition Club consist of new Avenue S2 along the northern boundary, with scattered residential north of that, cove residential to the west, vacant natural areas and flood control facilities to the south, and ranch properties and steep hillsides to the east. At the northwest corner is a. City park and a fire station. The adjacent land use designations and zoning districts consist of RC (Cove Residential) to the west, OS (Open Space) to the south and southeast, RL (Low Density Residential) to the east and north, MC (Major Community Facilities) and PR (Parks and Recreation) to the northwest: These adjacent land uses and designations are compatible with the proposed addition of the 32 lots. B. Would the project conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? No Impact. The City of La Quinta has jurisdiction over this project. The primary environmental plans and policies pertinent to this project are identified in. La Quinta's General Plan, the General Plan EIR, the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment, and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The addition of the 32 lots does not appear to conflict with any of the City's environmental policies or plans (Source: Zoning Ordinance; La Quinta MEA; La Quinta General Plan). C. Would the project modification be incompatible with the existing land use in the vicinity? No Impact. The project is designated LDR and RL. The surrounding properties to the west and north are also designated for residential land uses. Land to the south and east are designated as Open Space. Thus there is no anticipated impact for this issue. D. Would the project modification affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? No Impact. The La Quinta General Plan does not contain an agricultural land use designation although there are agricultural land uses extant in the south and southeastern portions of the City. Historically, there has been farming activity in several sections of the City, however, that has largely been replaced by resort and residential development over the past 15 years. The property involved in the Tradition project has been disturbed by farming activities since 1902; and periodic flood events. Active farming of the property ceased several years ago in anticipation ..of development. There. are only relic farming activities adjacent to the east of the project site. The historic ranch located adjacent to the east is not currently under cultivation. Thus, no impact on any agricultural resources or operations in the immediate area is likely to result from the proposed addition of these 32 lots (Source: La Quinta General Plan; Site Survey). . E. Would the project modification disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an. established community (including'a low-income minority community)? No Impact. The subdivision will be developed with custom single family lots for general. market sale. A private clubhouse and 271 acre 18-hole golf course have already been developed, along with 1.1 000412 024 a clubhouse, maintenance building, cart barn, and a half -way house. The proposed reconfiguration of lots as indicated in TTM 28867 will not affect the physical arrangement of the existing neighborhoods (Sources: Site Survey; Line of Sight Exhibits for TTM 28470). 3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING Regional Environmental Setting Between 1980 and 1990, the population of La Quinta.expanded 125%, as.reported by the U.S. Census, making the City the second fastest growing city in the Coachella Valley. During that time period, the number of residents in La Quinta blossomed from 4,992 to 11,215. From 1990 to January of 1996, the population grew from 13,070 to 18,050. These figures are based upon information provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, the State Department of Finance, and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG). La Quinta's population ranks sixth largest of the nine cities in the Coachella Valley. Annual average growth rate has been approximately 10% in recent years. The projected population of La Quinta by the year 2000 is anticipated to be 23,000 (Source: Community Development Department). The average age of a City resident is 32 years. Persons over the age of 45 make up 27% of the City's population (Source: 1990 Census). In addition to permanent residents, La Quinta has approximately 9,300 seasonal residents who. spend three to six months in the City. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City are. used by seasonal residents (Source: Community Development Department). The total housing stock as of 1996, is listed at 9,352 units. Single family units' make up 68 percent of the available housing stock. The housing unit breakdown is as follows: 8,624 detached single family, 481 multi -family units, and 247 mobile homes. The average number of persons per household is 3.15 (Source: Department of Finance 1996). Median home prices in La Quinta are approximately $117,400 which is lower than the average for Riverside County ($120,950), but less than other Southern California_ counties (Source: 1990 Census). . Ethnicity information from the 1990 Census revealed that the composition 'of La Quinta's population is 70% Caucasian;.26% hispanic, 2% Afro-American,. 1. 5% Asian, and 1.0%o Native American. The 1990 Census indicates that 8 1 % of the La Quinta residents are high school graduates and 21 % are college graduates (Source: Census/Estimates). Local Environmental Setting The area encompassed within the proposed tract consists of a 82.56 acre area within'a developing private country club. The area, including streets, has been graded according to TTM 28470. A. Would the project modification cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? 7 000413 02.5 Less Than Significant Impact. With the proposed modification of adding the 32 lots, the development planned for the Tradition project will ultimately result in the construction of 290 single family residences. TTM 28867 proposes to reconfigure 92 lots to create an additional 32 lots for a total of 124 residential lots, and 7 lettered lots for roadways. While the City's average.population is 2.85 per dwelling unit, the proposed project is projected to have a lower per unit population given the fact that it will be a private country club with high -end custom home lots. Typically, people buying into this type of project are among the high income individuals, usually older, with grown children no longer living with them. Often they will be seasonal residents, as. opposed to permanent residents. Using the factor of 1.94 people per unit, the potential build -out population for the 32 additional units could be 62 people. Sixty-two people combined with the 258 lots having a build out of 501 people will total a population of 563 new residents within the Tradition Club. The proposed subdivision will have a slight cumulative effect upon the local or regional population projections. B. Would the project modification induce substantial growth in an area either.directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in ail undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? No Impact. Increasing the lots by 32 will not impact major infrastructure as infrastructure has already been approved for and partially installed for the Tradition Club. Phase 2 has had all of the utility infrastructure completed; and all of the roads are completed. Phase 3 is currently having the utility infrastructure completed, and part of the roads are completed. C. Would the project modification displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision will have an impact upon existing housing, in that there would be an additional 32 residential lots created for house construction. 3.3 EARTH RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta has a relatively flat, but gently sloping topography, except for the hillside area on the southern and western portions of the City. Elevations in the southeastern portion of the City reach 1,400 feet above msl. Slopes on the valley floor.area of the City are gentle, -except in the rolling sand dune areas. The alluvial soils that make up most of the City are underlain by igneous - metamorphic rock, as seen in outcrops in the Santa Rosa Mountains and the Coral Reef Mountains. Soils on the valley floor are made up of very fine grain unconsolidated silty sands. The Coachella Valley is underlain by hundreds of feet to several thousand feet of Quaternary fluvial, lacustrine, and aeolian soil deposits (Southland Geotechnical 1996:6). Local Environmental Setting A review of historical aerial photographs indicates .that the site has been 'farmed in the distant past. 8 000414 026 The elevation of the property ranges from approximately 42 to 1.482 feet above mean sea level (Source: TTM 28470; USGS La Quinta Quad Map). A large portion of the project site will not be developed, as it is located in the steep, rocky Coral Reef Mountains. There is an inferred earthquake fault fine located approximately 1/z mile to the south of the southern boundary of the parcel, and one 3/4 mile to the east. There has been no recorded activity along these fault lines, thus there is a low probability for such activity to occur. The,City of La Quinta lies in a seismically active region of Southern California. Faults in the region include the San Andreas and Mission Creek faults located several miles to the north and west. The project lies within Groundshaking Zone III. with Zone 12 being the most hazardous (Sources: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan; La Quinta General Plan; La Quinta MEA). A Preliminary Soil Investigation was conducted on the entire Tradition Club project site, in November 1984, by Buena Engineers, Inc. The report was prepared for Tract 20328; the Sand Pebble Country Club. This report identifies three soil types on the property, light brown slightly silty fine to course sand and gravel, light brown silt and very fine sand, and brown silty fine to medium sand with some gravel. The investigation included ten borings drilled in various portions of the project site. The report states that the bearing soils showed expansion indices of zero when tested. All indications are that the soils on the site will allow for the proposed development, including single family houses. A. Would the project.modification result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: fault rupture? No Impact. The proposed modification of lots will not have any effect upon fault rupture issues. This issue was previously assessed in EA 96-333 for the entire project. Mitigation measures for this issue were made apart of the conditions of approval for the entire project. B. Would the project modification results in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismic. ground shaking? No Impact. The proposed modification will not have any effect upon ground shaking issues. This issue was previously assessed in EA 96-333 prepared for the entire project, with mitigation measures required. C. Would the project modification result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction? No Impact. The proposed modification will not have any effect upon ground failure or liquefaction issues. This issue was previously assessed 'in EA 96-333 prepared for the entire project, with mitigation measures required. Liquefaction is not considered a potential hazard since the groundwater is believed to be deeper than 000415, 0 2.7 50 feet (the maximum depth that liquefaction. is known to occur) (Source: Southland Geotechnical 1996:8). D. Would the project modification result in or expose people to potential impacts involving seismicity: seiche, tsunami or volcanic hazard? No Impact. The City is located in an inland valley, separated from the Pacific Ocean by mountain ranges, and would not be subjected to a tsunami. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir located in the southeast portion of the City, might experience some moderate wave activity as a result of an earthquake and groundshaking. However, the lake is not anticipated to affect this project in the event of a levee failure or seiche because the lake is on the other side of the Coral Reef Mountains (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map). E.- Would the project modification result in or expose people to potential impacts involving landslides or mudflows? No Impact. No mudflows are anticipated for the proposed reconfiguration of the lots, as the adjacent hills and mountains are formed of rocky granitic material. The general area of the project site is protected from flood waters by earthen training dikes and retention basins that are located at the southern boundary of the project; and existing retention basins and drainage channels within the Tradition Club project site. Additional on -site retention basins are proposed for the project site that will be incorporated into the 18-hole gold course features (Source: La Quinta MEA; La Quinta USGS 7.5' Quad Map; TT 28470). F. Would the project modification result in or expose people to potential impacts involving erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, -grading, or fill? . Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed reconfiguration of lots could have a slight effect upon erosion, excavation, grading of fill issues as the lots will have to be regraded into the proposed configuration. A new grading plan and geotechnical report will be required for the proposed subdivision that will be reviewed for these concerns by the Community Development Department and the Public Works Department. Conditions of approval will then be' attached to the grading permit to prevent and mitigate erosion or soil stability issues. G. Would the project modification result in or expose people to potential impacts involving . subsidence of the land? No Impact. The project site is not located'in an area designated for subsidence hazards. Dynamic settlement results in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated 'Soils mix with perched groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground (Source: La Quinta MEA). The geotechnical. report prepared for this new subdivision shall address any soil stability issues. H. Would the project modification result in or expose people to potential impacts involving expansive soils? Less Than Significant Impact. The underlying soils on the proposed subdivision area have a low 10 00041R fl9R potential for expansion, thus future construction is not expected to be subject to problems from soil expansion. The City requires compliance with the Uniform Building Code and the recommendations of a soils investigation report prior to issuance of building and grading permits (Sources: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Riverside County, California - Coachella Valley Area). I. Would the project modification result in or expose people to potential impacts involving unique geologic or physical features? No Impact. The Coral Reef Mountains represent a unique geologic feature in the La Quinta area. This unique feature is located inthe eastern portion of the project site. The proposed subdivision will create additional residential lots that will increase the density of the Tradition Club development. Refer to the discussion on Aesthetics in this document. 3.4 WATER Regional Environmental ,Setting Groundwater resources in the La Quinta area consist of a system of large aquifers (porous layers of rock material containing water) and groundwater basins, separated by bedrock or layers of soil that trap or retain groundwater.. La Quinta is located above the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin which is the major water supply for the potable water needs of the City as well as a significant supply for the:City's nonpotable irrigation needs. Water is pumped from the underground aquifer via domestic water wells in the City operated and administered by the Coachella Valley Water . District (CVWD). La Quinta is located primarily in the lower Thermal Subarea of the .groundwater basin. The Thermal Subarea is separated into the .upper and lower valley sub -basins near Point Happy, located southwest of the intersection of Washington Street and State Highway 111. CVWD estimates that approximately 19.4.trAon acre feet of water is stored within the Thermal Subarea which is' available for use. Water pumped from the aquifer is treated and distributed to users through the existing (potable) water distribution system. Water is also pumped for irrigation purposes to water golf courses and the remaining agricultural uses in the City. Water -supplies are augmented with surface water from the Colorado River transported via the. Coachella Canal. The quality of water in the La Quinta area is highly suitable for domestic purposes. However, chemicals associated with agricultural production in nearby areas and the use of septic tanks in the Cove area affect groundwater quality. Groundwater is of marginal to poor quality at depths of less than 200 feet. Below 200 feet, water quality is generally good and water depths of 400 to 600 feet are considered excellent. Percolation from the tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the Santa. Rosa Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial recharging of groundwater will be a necessary in the near future. Surface water in La Quinta is comprised of Colorado River water supplied via the Coachella Canal and stored in the Lake Cahuilla reservoir; lakes in private developments which are comprised of 11 00'0417 029 canal water and/or untreated groundwater; and the Whitewater River and its tributaries. The watersheds in La Quinta are.subject to intense storms of short duration which result in substantial runoff. The steep gradient of the Santa Rosa Mountains accelerates the runoff. flowing in the intermittent streams that drain the mountain watersheds. La Quinta is protected from this runoff by the existing flood control facilities located throughout the City. One of the primary sources of surface water pollution is erosion and sedimentation from development construction and operation activities. Without controls, total dissolved solids (TDS) can increase significantly from the development activities: The Clean Water Act requires all communities to conform to standards regulating the quality of water discharged into streams, including stormwater runoff. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) has been implemented as a two-part permitting process, for which the City of La Quinta participates. La Quinta is protected from storm water runoff by a stormwater system designed by Bechtel for the Coachella Valley Water District to protect currently developed and potentially developable areas of the City from damage during a major rainflood event. The system project was based on a flood control plan for the general area developed by Bechtel for the District in 1970. Construction was completed in November 1986 (Source: Bechtel Civil, Inc. 1989:1). Local Environmental Setting The Tradition Club does not have any natural standing water. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir is located approximately two miles to the southeast., on the other side of the Coral Reef Mountain. The Whitewater River channel is located slightly over 3 miles to the north of the project site, but is dry except during seasonal storms. The La Quinta Stormwater Channel is located approximately 1 mile to the north is a part of the community -wide network of flood control facilities. The City currently has only limited areas which are still subject to storm water flow or flooding. Flood prone areas are designated with a specific zoning district (Watercourse; Watershed and Conservation Areas: W-1). The intent of this zoning district is to allow development in flood prone areas based upon the submittal of a drainage and stormwater control plan. The City also implements flood hazard regulations for development within flood prone areas. Existing flood control facilities on the proposed project site are a part of the City-wide Stormwater Project - East La Quinta System. The facilities were designed by a previous developer's engineer, with the design reviewed by Bechtel. Construction of these facilities was completed in mid-1988, by E. L. Yeager Construction Company. The East La Quinta System intercepts and controls runoff originating in the drainage area in the foothills.east and southeast of Avenida Bermudas, and from the presently developed area of the City of La Quinta south of Calle Durango. The system consists of the Upper Training Dike, Calle Tecate Detention Basin, East La Quinta Channel, Avenida Bermudas Detention Basin, the proposed Tradition project. site facilities, and a 60-irich diameter buried stormwater conduit. The detention basin on the. project site has a storage volume of about 520 A.F. below El. 59, while maintaining a minimum one foot freeboard (Source: Bechtel Civil, Inc. 1989). 12 i 030 A Hydrology/Hydraulic Report was prepared for the Tradition Club project site, in October 1996, by Keith International, Inc.. The project proposes areas north of the detention basin to provide for on site retention. Runoff from the residential,. clubhouse, and golf course areas will be conveyed to depressions located within the golf course. The retention areas have been integrated into the golf course grading plan as golfing amenities. The basin sizing is based on the total run off from a 24 hour - 100. year event. Five basins are proposed with the following locations and capacities: Hole # Basin Caoacilx 1 16 7.90 acre feet 2 Driving Range 83.50 acre feet 3 4 14.50 4 2 & 3 31.30 5 1 41.80 (lake) The hydrology study modeled the 100-year and 10 year storm events to determine which storm will generate the greatest storm volume. The results will be utilized to determine the size of the retention basins. It was determined that historic flows are retained onsite, thus the development within the tradition Club must retain all of the flows onsite (Source: Keith International. Inc. 1996). A. Would the project modification result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed subdivision must drain in accordance with the approved master drainage plan for the Tradition Club. An approved drainage plan and study was prepared by Keith International, Inc., October 1996. There could be slight changes in absorption rates, but not drainage patterns or surface runoff as a result of the proposed subdivision. Absorption rates are altered by the paving of streets, building of homes, and landscaping of yards, landscape lots, and the golf course. The traditional historical drainage pattern will be maintained as is required by the City. Retention basins and other facilities will catch and hold the surface runoff storm water on=site. B. Would the project modification result in exposure of people or property to water -related hazards such as flooding? No Impact. The project site is within .the.X designated flood hazard area. The X Zone.consists of areas of 500-year flood and areas of 100-year flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile, and areas protected by levees from 100-year flood. There are existing on -site flood control or drainage facilities on the property, that were constructed by the Coachella Valley Water District as part of the East La Quinta Storm Drain system. These. improvements were coordinated with an earlier planned golf course development, formally known as the "Heritage Country Club". The Tradition project intends to fully utilize these existing improvements and integrate them into the overall development and drainage system. The existing structures and basins will remain in place. The new design will maintain all structure capacities and volumes. Even with the additional 32 lots, the Tradition project is significantly less dense than the earlier "Heritage Country Club", reducing the runoff rate and flood volumes to these existing 13 .00,9419 n�� n u structures. The development. has submitted a drainage plan which will include 5 additional retention basins and drainage improvements onsite (Source: Keith International, Inc. 1996). C. Would the project modification result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? Less Than Significant Impact. Runoff from the project site is already required to be directed .into the five proposed retention basins and be controlled by existing drainage facilities. There are no existing bodies of surface water on or adjacent to the project site. Five lakes have been.constructed on the golf course which also function as retention areas (Source: Site Survey; Coachella Valley Water District; TT 28470). The reconfiguration of the lots would have no impact on discharge into surface waters or alter surface quality. ,D. Would the project modification result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? No Impact. There are no natural bodies of surface water on the lots within the proposed subdivision area. There are man-made golf course lakes within the golf course that are designed to serve as flood water retention facilities. The proposed subdivision does not indicate any changes to the amount of surface. water entering into these lakes. E. Would the project modification result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed lot configuration will not have any direct effect upon currents.or water movements as the lots within the are not adjacent to any body of water. F. Would the project modification result in changes in quantity of ground Waters, either through direct additions or withdrawal, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or by excavations? Less Than Significant Impact. Water supply in the City is derived from groundwater and supplementary water brought in from the Colorado River. The Tradition project will consist of single family units and the golf course. Potable water to service this development will most likely come from existing groundwater wells in the near vicinity and a new well to be located by.the third green. The golf course is irrigated from existing wells on the project site. These wells were formerly. used for agricultural* irrigation and are in working order. The Planning Standard'for residential water consumption is 315 Gal/DU/Day. The increased day water consumption would be 32 units x 315 Gal/DU/Day = 10,080 Gallons for the single family residential use. The Coachella Valley Water District has stated that it will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to the project, but will eventually need additional facilities to provide for expansion of its domestic water system because of the development throughout its service area. These new facilities may include wells, reservoirs, and booster pumping stations. Water from the Coachella Canal is also available for irrigation of the golf course and green belt areas that are within Improvement District No. 1 .(Sources: La Quinta MEA; Application Materials; Coachella Valley Water District). 0004ti0 14 032 G. Would the project. modification result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed reconfiguration of the lots would not have a cumulative effect on groundwater wells. It is not anticipated that there will be any significant alteration to the direction of flow of the groundwater supply. H. Would the project modification result in impacts to groundwater quality? Less Than Significant Impact. The reconfiguration of the lots within the subdivision may increase the concrete and asphalt pavement of portions of the site, and golf course pathways. This pavement will reduce the absorption ability of the ground. Storm water runoff will be discharged into on -site basins channels, lakes, and pipes. Following any additional heavy rain, contaminates could be transported into the basins or into the nearby storm drains that could contribute to groundwater and/or surface water pollution. However, this potential impact is anticipated with the reconfiguration to be less than significant. Golf course lake best management practices will be required to be implemented in order to minimize surface water pollution. The applicant has already been required to line the golf course lakes with an impermeable product with a hard edge grouted in, in order to protect groundwater supplies. I. Would the project modification result in substantial reduction in the amount of ground water otherwise available for public water supplied? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed 32 lot reconfiguration will result in additional cumulative impacts on water supply. However, this impact is not anticipated to be significant. 3.5 AIR QUALITY Regional Environmental Setting The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and in particular, the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB) division. SEDAB has a distinctly different air pollution problem than the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). A discussion of the jurisdictional organization of SCAQMD and requirements is found in'the La Quinta MEA. The air quality in Southern California region has historically been poor due to the topography, climatological influences, and urbanization. State and federal clean air standards established by the California Air Resources Board and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are often exceeded. The SCAQMD is a regional agency charged with the regulation of pollutant emissions and the maintenance of local air quality standards. The SCAQMD samples air at over 32 monitoring station in and around the Basin. According to the 1989 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan, SEDAB experiences poor air quality, but of a lesser extent than the SCAB. Currently, the SEDAB does not meet federal standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter (PM-10). In the Coachella Valley, the standard for PM-10 is frequently exceeded. PM-10 is a particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter that becomes suspended in the air due to winds, y, and by vehicles traveling on unpaved roads, among other causes. 15 033 Local Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, which has an and climate; characterized by hot summers; mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and. low humidity. Variations in rainfall, temperatures, and localized winds occur throughout the valley due to the presence of the surrounding mountains. Air quality conditions are closely tied to the prevailing winds of the region. The City of La Quinta is subject to the SCAQMD AQMD, a plan which describes measures to bring the SCAB into compliance with federal and state air quality standards and to meet California Clean Air Act requirements. The General Plan for the City contains an Air Quality Element outlining mitigation measures as required by the Regional AQMP. The City is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes two air quality monitoring stations, one located in the City of Palm Springs, and the other in the City of Indio. The Indio station monitors conditions which are most representative of the La Quinta area. The station has been collecting data for ozone and particulates since 1983. The Palm Springs station monitors' carbon monoxide in addition to ozone and particulate and has been in operation since 1985. A. Would the project modification violate any air standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates that the threshold for significance in single family development is at 170 units. Above 170 units may result in a significant impact to the air quality, unless mitigation is implemented. To assess the potential impacts of this project, a computerized air quality analysis was conducted by Community Development staff. The assessment, contained in EA 96-333, indicated that the proposed project would produce temporary construction emissions during the construction of the original 241 single family home sites. Emissions produced during construction would vary daily depending on the type of activity. Emissions would be generated during grading, frame building and other construction activities. The addition of 32 lots would cumulatively increase the projected air quality impacts (Source: Screen.xls): Mitigation measures are included in Environmental Assessment 96-333 to lessen the impacts identified for the entire Tradition Club development to a level of insignificance. These mitigation measures should be incorporated by reference for TT 28867. B. Would the project modification expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors include schools, day care centers, parks and recreation centers, medical facilities, rest homes, and other land uses that include concentration of individuals recognized as exhibiting particular sensitivity to air pollution. The adjacent land uses consist of residential to the west and north, residential development to the northeast, and open space to the south and east. The closest schools located to the proposed project are Adams Elementary School located north of Calle Tampico and west of Washington Street, and the La Quinta Middle School and Truman Elementary School located east of Washington'Street and north of Avenue 50. The closest existing public park is the Fritz B. Burns Park located near the northwest corner of the 16 0004P? O .R 4 Tradition Club. The Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) are designed to protect that segment of the public most susceptible to respiratory distress or infection, referred to, as "sensitive receptors." (Sources: La Quinta General Plan; Site Survey). C. Would the project modification alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any change in climate? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed lot reconfiguration is not anticipated to result in any significant impact upon this issue area. All proposed 124 home sites would be required to meet the development and architectural standards contained in the Tradition Club Design. Guidelines. Moisture content may increase as the golf course and individual yards are planted and irrigated. Swimming pools would add to the moisture index of the area. There are no significant climatic changes anticipated with the future development of the parcels, and there is no feasible mitigation for this issue. The applicant is not proposing any alternative designs for this project modification. D. Would the project modification create objectionable odors? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed lot reconfiguration will not result in development which may create objectionable odors, such as waste hauling or chemical products. Vehicles traveling on nearby and internal project streets generate gaseous and particular emissions that may be noticeable on the project site. However, these would be short-term odors that should dissipate quickly (Source: Site Survey): 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Regional Environmental Setting La Quinta is a desert community of over 19,400 permanent residents: The City is 31.18 square miles . in size, with substantial room for development. The existing circulation system is a combination of early .road work constructed in the 1930's by Riverside County and new roadways since incorporation of the City in 1982. Key roadways include State Highway 111, Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, and Eisenhower Drive. Traffic volumes in La Quinta -experience considerable seasonal variation, with the late -winter, early spring months representing the peak tourist season and highest traffic volumes. There is a relatively low incidence of automobile accidents at the intersection of Washington Street and 52'd Avenue (Source: Public Works Department; La Quinta MEA). Existing transit service in La Quinta is limited to three regional fixed -route bus routes operated by Sun Line Transit Agency. One bus route along Washington Street connects the Cove and Village• areas with the community of Palm Desert to the. west. Two fines operate along Highway I11 serving trips between La Quinta and other communities in the desert. There are only a few existing pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian facilities in La Quinta, however, these systems will be expanded as the City grows. These facilities, both existing and future, are 17 000442'3 035 designated in the La Quinta General Plan. Local Environmental Setting, The subject project site is generally located south of the southern terminus of Washington Street, east of Avenida Bermudas. Washington Street is classified as a major arterial with a 120 foot right- of-way. The intersection of Washington Street and 52nd Avenue is currently controlled by 4-way stop signs. Avenida Bermudas is classified as a secondary arterial with an 80-foot right-of-way: Avenida Bermudas is located along the western boundary of the project site. It is designated as a bikeway corridor. The La Quinta General Plan gives design standards for the various street classifications. According to the standards for major arterials, the projected buildout traffic volume for Washington Street, north of the subject property will exceed the volume range. It is projected that Washington Street will experience a daily traffic volume of 52,600 south of 50`h Avenue, at buildout, providing a Level Of Service D (LOS-D). LOS-D has unstable flow with poor progression and frequent cycle failures. This is considered the limit of acceptable delay. LOS F has oversaturation with arrival flow rates exceeding the capacity of the intersection and is considered unacceptable to most drivers. A more detailed explanation of buildout traffic conditions and levels of service is found in the La Quinta General Plan.. A discussion on this issue is found in EA 96-333, prepared for the Tradition Club TTM 28470, in 1996. A. Would the project modification result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated.. Even with the proposed additional lots, the housing units for the Tradition Club development are less than what was used in the "build -out" traffic model for the 1991 La Quinta General Plan. Approximately 320 additional daily vehicle trips may be generated by the proposed addition of 32 residential lots, using a factor of 10 trips per unit. The additional lots will not result in additional vehicle trips that will exceed that anticipated by the build - out scenario contained in the City's 1992 General Plan. B. Would the project modification result in hazards to safety from design features (e:g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact. No modification is being requested to the existing roadways or the circulation system. C. Would the project modification result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed lot configuration would not obstruct emergency access to surrounding land uses. D. Would the project modification result in insufficient parking capacity on -site or off -site? Less Than Significant Impact. Parking will be required for each of the proposed additional custom-built housing unit as it is.constructed. The parking will consist of a two to three car garage, and tandem parking in the driveway. On -street parking will not be available (Source: La Quinta 18 000424 036 Zoning Ordinance; La Quinta Subdivision Ordinance; TTM 28470). E. Would the project modification result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists? Less Than Significant Impact. The east side of Avenida Bermudas and the east side of Washington Street are designated bikeway corridors. It is anticipated that hazards to bicyclists and pedestrians will not be increased significantly as a result of the proposed lot reconfiguration (Source: La Quinta General Plan). The bicycle and pedestrian corridors will be outside 'of the project perimeter wall, along the east side of Avenue Bermudas..There will not be any identifiable increase in hazards than currently exist. F. Would the project modification result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting. alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. Bicycle racks are only required for commercial land uses. The Zoning Ordinance does not require bicycle racks for residential projects (Source: La Quinta Zoning Ordinance). G. Would the project modification result in rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? No Impacts. There is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. There are no navigable rivers or waterways, or air travel lanes or airports within the City. 3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta lies within the Colorado Desert regional environment. Two ecosystems are found within the City, the Sonoran Desert Scrub and the Desert Transition. The disturbed environments within the City are classified as either urban or agricultural. A detailed discussion of these ecosystems is found in the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (1992). .Local Environmental Setting The project site is located in the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem. Typically, undeveloped land within this ecosystem is rich in biological resources and habitat. However, the project site.has been disturbed by agriculture and mass grading in the distant and recent past. The Sonoran Desert Scrub is the most typical environment found in the Coachella Valley. It is generally categorized as containing plants which have the ability to economize water uses, go dormant during periods of drought, or both. Cacti are very common in these areas due to their ability to store water. Other plants root deeply and draw upon water from considerable depths. The variations of desert vegetation result from differences in the availability of water. The most dense and lush vegetation in the.desert is found where groundwater is most plentiful. The Sonoran Scrub areas are considered habitat for a number 'of small mammals. These animals escape the summer heat through their nocturnal and /or burrowing tendencies. Squirrels; mice and 19 00-9.495. 037 rats are all common rodent species in this environment. The black -tailed hare is a typical manurial. Predator species include kit fox, coyote, and mountain' lion in the higher elevations. The largest mammal species found in this area is the Peninsular Bighorn sheep which is found at the higher elevations of the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountain ranges. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the Sonoran Scrub area. The Desert Transition areas are found in the alluvial fan areas and slopes of the surrounding mountains. The transition is gradual and involves an intermingling of vegetation types typically found in the Desert Scrub ecosystem and the Pinon-Juniper Woodland near the top of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The plant species in the desert transition zone benefit from slightly higher rainfall. Where creosote bush and bur -sage dominated in the desert scrub areas, cacti become more abundant and ocotillo dominate on the upper.portions of alluvial fans, bajadas, and rocky mountain slopes. The La Quinta General Plan identifies the property as being within the habitat of the Fringe -toed Lizard. In addition, there have been sightings of the endangered plant, California ditaxis, in the general area of the project (Sources: Site Survey; La Quinta MEA). A. Would the project modification result in impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants; fish, insects, animals, and birds)? No Impact. The proposed lot reconfiguration will involve the regrading of already graded lots, and will have no increased impacts: The City transmitted application materials for TTM 28867 to California Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service on June 16, 1998, for review and comments. No written response has been received from either agency as of July 10, 1998. B. Would the project modification result in impacts to locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? No Impact. There are no locally designated. biological resources within the City of La Quinta, or on the proposed TTM 28867 project area. C. Would the project modification result in impacts to locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? . No Impact. There are no locally designated natural communities found in or near the project site. D. Would the project modification result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? No Impact. There are no natural wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal pools on the project site or nearby.. E. Would the project modification result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration 20 00049-6 038 corridors? No Impact. The proposed lot reconfiguration of the lots affects an area which has already been graded and is not within a wildlife corridor." 3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta contains both areas of insignificant and significant Mineral Aggregate Resource Areas (SMARA), as designated by the State Department of Conservation. There are no known oil resources in the City. Major energy resources used in La Quinta come from the Imperial Irrigation District (I1D), Southern California Gas Company, and various gasoline companies. Local Environmental Setting There are no oil wells or other fuel or energy producing facilities or resources on or near the area affected by the lot reconfiguration. While the project site is undeveloped, there is no significant resource to be mined, such as rock or gravel. The Tradition Club is located within MRZ-1 and MRZ-3. The MRZ-1 designation is applied to those areas where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral despots.are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. The NM-3 designation is for those areas containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data. The northern portion of the. Tradition Club is within an area of Prime Agricultural Soils (Source:.La Quinta MEA; Site Survey' EA 96-333). A. Would the project modification conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have an adopted energy plan. However, the City does have a Transportation Demand Management ordinance in place that focuses on the conservation of fuel and travel to large commercial centers. The Housing Element contains requirements for efficiency in housing construction and materials, thus reducing energy consumption. Future development will be required to meet Title 24 energy requirements. B. Would the project modification use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? Less Than Significant Impact. Natural resources that may be used by the additional 32 housing units include air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, and other resources needed for construction and operation. Title 24 requirements shall be complied with for energy conservation for the new units. Any landscaping for the additional units will also be required to comply with the City's landscape water conservation ordinance as well as the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District (Source: La Quinta MEA; Water Conservation Ordinance, Coachella Valley Water District). C. Would the project modification result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 21 00-4A 7 ;rl`1q resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of State? No Impact. TTM 28867 is within the MU-3 Mineral Resource Area. Minerals in this zone have not been evaluated for significance from available data.. The subdivision site has been graded and is planned for single family residential development. 3.9 HAZARDS Regional Environmental Setting Exposure to toxic materials can occur through the air, in drinking water, in food, in drugs and cosmetics, and in the work place. Although large scale, hazardous waste generating employment is not present in the City of La Quinta, the existence of chemicals utilized in dry cleaning operations, agricultural operations, restaurant kitchen cleaning, landscape irrigation and exposure to large scale electrical facilities may pose significant threats to various sectors of the population. Currently, there are no hazardous disposal waste sites located in Riverside County, although transportation of such material out of, and around, La Quinta takes place., Local Environmental Setting . In order to.comply with AB 2948-Hazardous Waste Management Plans and Facility Siting Procedures, the City of ' La Quinta adopted Ordinance 184 consisting of a Hazardous Waste Management Plan. The project site has not been used for any type of manufacturing or industry, and . there has not been any known dumping of hazardous substances on the property (Sources: Site Survey; Aerial Photos). A. Would 'the project modification involve a risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including not limited to oil, pesticides, chemical, or radiation)? Less Than Significant Impact. There is a minimal risk of exposure from swimming pool chemicals and pesticides that may be used by residents of the proposed 32 future home sites within the project. B. Would the project modification involve possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities relating to the reconfigured lots will be confined to the area encompassed with proposed Tract 28867. These activities will not be permitted to interfere with emergency responses to the site or surrounding areas nor will it obstruct emergency evacuation of the area. Needed measures to divert and control traffic shall be implemented whenever required (Source: TTM 28867). The Fire Department's requirements for emergency access to the Tradition project are unaffected by the lot reconfiguration. C. Would the project modification involve the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? 22 4004?g 04.0 No Impact. There are no anticipated health hazards associated with the proposed lot reconfiguration beyond those normally associated with a residential construction project (Source:. TTM 28867). D. Would the project modification involve exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? No Impact. There are no identifiable health hazards with the area comprising Tract 28867. The proposed lot configuration is not expected to create any health hazards. All development within the Tradition Club including the residential development within Tract 28867 will be required to conform to zoning standards and all applicable health and safety codes. E. Would the proposed modification involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? Less Than Significant Impact. The Tradition Club is on an alluvial fan. with sparse. natural . vegetation due to disturbance from previous mass grading for the'flood control facilities on the project site and the grading previously completed for the Tradition project. Thus, there is a very low fire potential from brush, grass, or trees. 3.10 NOISE Regional Environmental Setting Noise levels in the City are created by a variety of sources within and outside the City boundaries. The major sources of noise include vehicles on City streets and Highway 111, and temporary construction noise. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along the highway and major arterial roadways. Local Environmental Setting The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic noise from Washington Street and Avenue 52. Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the nighttime hours. The nearest residential, use is located adjacent to the east and north of the project site. The State Building Code requires that interior noise level in buildings do not exceed CNEL 45. The General Plan of the City. of La Quinta requires that exterior noise levels do not exceed CNEL 60. A noise study has been prepared for the Tradition Club development. A. Would the project modification result in increases in existing noise levels? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. An acoustical study of the Tradition Club development. 23 000429 04.1 were conducted in December, 1996, by Gordon Bricken & Associates. The reports state that noise levels are dominated by vehicular traffic on Avenue 52 to the north, and Avenida Bermudas to the west. No other significant sources of noise were noted during the site visit. The report discusses the design of the then proposed master project and recommends mitigation measures to protect the proposed homes from street noise. Mitigation includes the construction of at least a 6 foot solid wall along the perimeter of the project, and constructing to meet certain criteria to ensure an outdoor -to - indoor noise intrusion of no greater than 45 dBA. These criteria are contained in the acoustical study and were made part of the Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for TTM 28470 (Source: Gordon Bricken & Associates 1996). In order to ensure compliance with the recommendation of the acoustical study, the pad elevations on several lots along Avenida Bermudas have been reduced. The wall will not only define the project's boundaries, but will serve to mitigate sound attenuation impacts. B. Would the project modification result m exposure of people to severe noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta General Plan regulates excessive noise and vibration in the City by establishing allowable noise levels for various land uses. Residential land uses should have a maximum exterior noise level of up to 60 CNEL. If the ambient noise level is higher than this standard, then it will serve as the standard. The existing CNEL along Washington Street; Avenue 52, and Avenida Bermudas corridors adjacent to the Tradition Club is 60+ dBA. The interior of the Tradition Club, next to Ave. Bermudas, is between 50 and 60 dBA for that area close to the Coral Reef Mountains is less than 50 dBA (Source: La Quinta MEA). The proposed lot reconfiguration will not.result in impacts associated with construction activities beyond those analyzed in Environmental Assessment 96-333. 3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES Regional Environmental Setting Law enforcement. services are provided to the City through a contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. The Sheriff's Department extends service to the City from existing facilities located in the City of Indio. There is a small substation located within City Hall. The Department utilizes a planning. standard of 1.5 deputies per 1,000 population to forecast additional public safety personnel requirements in La Quinta at buildout. Based on this standard, the City should have a police force of 25.5 officers, but is currently underserved. Currently, there are three officers per shift with three staggered shifts per day to serve La Quinta. In addition to patrol, there is also a target team, Community Services Officer, and School Resources Officer assigned to the City (Source: 101-301 Police Services Supporting Information). Fire protection service is provided to the City by Riverside County Fire Department through a contractual arrangement.'The Fire Department administers two stations in. the City; Station #32 on Frances Hack Lane, west of Washington Street, and Station #70, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. The Fire Department is also responsible for building and business inspections, plan review, and construction inspections. Based upon a planning standard of one paid firefighter 24 000430 Al r% per 1,000 population, the City.is currently underserved (Source: La Quinta MEA). Currently, there are two paid. firefighters per shift at each of the two fire stations in La Quinta. Volunteers. supplement the paid staff (Source: La Quinta Building & Safety Department). Structural fires and .fires from other man-made features are the most significant fire threats to the City. Hillside and brush fires are minimal as the hillside areas are virtually barren and the scattered brush on the valley floor is too sparse to pose a serious fire threat. Both the Desert Sands Unified School District and the Coachella Valley Unified School District serve the City. There are two elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school within the City. The City is also within the College of the Desert Community College District. Library services are provided by the Riverside County Library System with a branch library located in the Village area of the City. The existing facility opened in 1988 and unadopted planning standards of 0.5 square feet per capita and 1.2 volumes per capita to forecast future facility requirements to serve the City. Utilizing this 1992 standard, the City was underserved in space but overserved in terms of volumes (Source: La Quinta MEA). Health care services are provided in the City through JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio, and the Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility in the 111. Center. The Eisenhower Medical Center is located in Rancho Mirage. The Riverside County Health Department administers a variety of health programs for area residents and is located in Indio. Paramedic service is provided to the City by Springs Ambulance Service. Local Environmental Setting The nearest City fire station to the project site is Station #32 located at the northwest corner of the project site. Governmental services in La Quinta are provided by City staff at the Civic Center, and by other County, state, and federal agency offices located in the desert area or region. The project site will be serviced by the local schools. A. Would the project modification have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or' altered governmental services in relation to.fire protection? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed lot reconfiguration could slightly increase the need for fire protection due to the construction of the proposed 32 additional residential units. However, development of the Tradition project is required to comply with the fire flow and fire safety building standards of the Riverside County Fire Code to prevent fire hazard on -site and to minimize the need for fire protection services. Unobstructed fire access will be required through the design of the project streets and setbacks between structures. Other code requirements (such as sprinkler systems, construction materials, etc.) shall be complied with (Source: Fire Department, June 9, 108). B. Would the project modification have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or altered government services in relation to police protection? 25 0.00431 043 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Comments have been received by the Sheriff's Department for the Tradition Club development as a whole. The additional 32 lots will not cause significant cumulative impact upon police protection services by the construction of new residential units that will generate calls for various types of police services and protection. C. Would the project modification have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to school services? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. A response to the lot reconfiguration proposal in TTM 28867 was received from the Desert Sands Unified School District, dated June 8, 1998. The letter states that the proposed project will potentially result in an impact on their school system. The school mitigation fee that is currently collected on all new development at the time building permits Are issued will be.required of this project. No additional mitigation is requested by the school district (Source: DSUSD letter of June 8, 1998). D. Would the project modification have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to the maintenance of public facilities, including .roads? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The Tradition project site is already served by existing infrastructure. The proposed lot reconfiguration will not require new and altered services for the maintenance of roadways or other facilities, as internal streets will be private. E. * Would the project modification have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in relation to other governmental services? Less Than. Significant Impact. Building, engineering, inspection; and planning review needed for the proposed additional lots will be partially offset by application, permit and inspection fees charged to the applicant and contractors. 3.12 UTILITIES Regional Environmental Services The City of La Quinta is served by the Imperial Irrigation District (HD) for electrical power supply and The Gas Company (TGC) for natural gas service. Existing power and gas lines and substations are found throughout the City. I1D has four substations in La Quinta, with electricity generated by a steam plant in El Centro and hydroelectric power generated by the All American Canal. General Telephone Exchange (GTE) provides telephone services for the City. Media One serves the area for cable television service. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides water and sewer service to the City. CVWD obtains its water from underground aquifers and from the Colorado River. CVWD operates a water system with potable water pumped from domestic water wells in the City. The wells range in depth from 500 to 900 feet. Potable water is stored in five reservoirs located in the City. The City's stormwater drainage system is administered by the CVWD, which maintains and operates 26 nnna_q2 044 a comprehensive system to collect and transport flows through the City. The City is served by Waste Management of the Desert for solid waste disposal. Nonhazardous, mixed municipal solid . waste is taken to three landfills within the Coachella Valley. Local Environmental Setting The Tradition Club is adjacent to developed areas on the west, north, and east. The site is former farm land that has been under cultivation until 1996 when the Tradition Club development, was approved and began construction activities. A. Would the project modification result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to power and gas service? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Power, sewer, and natural gas lines have been brought in to the community and are available to the project site. It is not anticipated that the lot reconfiguration will require a significant level of electricity or natural gas to result in the need for new systems or alterations to existing systems. The project developer will have to coordinate with IID, .CVWD, cable company, and TGC for the timely provision of utilities. ,A response letter from IID, dated June 29, 1998, was received by the City. The letter states that residential development projects may impact power rates in the IID's service area and may result in higher electric rates in the future years. B. Would the project modification result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to communication systems? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed additional lots would require service from General Telephone Exchange (GTE) for telephone communication, as part of the orderly and continued development of the Tradition Club. The developer will be required to coordinate the installation of telephone service infrastructure with GTE. C. Would the project modification result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The. proposed additional lots would require water service. It is not anticipated that the lot reconfiguration will result in a significant adverse impact upon the water resources of CVWD. Potable water consumption has been discussed in section 3.4 of this document. A response letter from CVWD has been. received that states that the district will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to the entire project. (Source: CVWD letter dated November 14, 1996,'and June 18, 1998). D. Would the project modification result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to sewer services or septic tanks? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed lot reconfiguration will generate sewage which will 27 000433 045 have to be transported and treated by CVWD. The developer will be responsible for the cost of connection and installation of an on -site sewer system. A response from CVWD has been received. See discussion above in subsection D (Source: CVWD letter dated November 14, 1996, and June 18, 1998). E. Would the project modification result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to storm water drainage? Less Than Significant Impact. The area affected by the lot reconfiguration is part of a developing private community with an existing community -based storm water system. The lot reconfiguration will result in additional construction of buildings, pavement and landscaping, but the incremental increase in stormwater will be handled by the on -site retention facilities already required for the development of the project. The Whitewater River Storm channel is located approximately 3 miles south of the project site. There will be no significant impacts to the channel (Source: Site Survey; La Quinta General Plan). F. Would the project modification result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration to solid waste disposal? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed.lot reconfiguration will require additional solid waste disposal services from Waste Management of the Desert, the current purveyor of solid waste collection. Solid waste may be transported to the three existing landfills in the Coachella Valley. These landfills are reaching capacity and may be closed in the near future. Development must comply with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling policies. However, other sites or alternative types of waste disposal projects are being considered. Any on -site programs will be coordinated with Waste Management. Solid waste generation is calculated at 4.00 lbs. per person per day (La Quinta General Plan). The densities of the modified lot reconfiguration is still lower than those permitted by the City's General Plan. G. Would the project modifications affect local or regional water supplies? Less than Significant Impact. TTM 28867 as proposed would result in an additional 32 residential lots within a developing private community. The Coachella Valley Water District has submitted a will -serve letter for this subdivision. 3.13 AESTHETICS Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is partially located within a desert valley cove. There are hillsides to the west and south of the City.. Views of the desert and surrounding mountains are visible on clear days throughout most of the City. Local Environmental Setting 28 00-9434 046 The Tradition project site is located in a predominately residential zoned area in the southern portion of the City. The Cove residential area immediately to the west, allows a maximum height of 17 feet for a single family residence. The proposed project site is in the RL district that allows up to 28 feet in height. However, this development restricts all buildings to 24-feet in height with the exception for houses along Avenida Bermudas that are restricted to 17-feet within a 150-foot wide corridor from Avenida Bermudas right of way, a mitigation for identified aesthetic impacts. Views from the project site consists of the Santa Rosa and Coral. Reef Mountains to the south and southeast, the alluvial fan area to the southwest, and the open > alley floor to the north and northeast (Source: Site Survey; La Quinta MEA; EA 96-333; EA 98-354). A. Would the project modification affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? Potentially significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed subdivision site is located within General Plan designated viewshed No. ],which includes both distinctive and attractive. types of viewsheds. The vistas from the project site include the Coral Reef Mountains adjacent to the east and south, the Santa Rosa Mountains to the south and west, and the valley floor to the northeast. Significant aesthetic impacts due to the six lots on the hillside and houses along Avenida Bermudas negatively impacting views looking east along Avenida Bermudas, were identified by Environmental Assessment 96-333 for TTM 28470, and by Environmental Assessment 98-354 for TTM 28470 Amendment #1 (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site Survey; EA 96-333; EA 98-35.4). Mitigation for reducing the impact was to reduce the height of the houses from Zoning Code requirement of 28- feet to 17-feet within a 150-foot corridor from Avenida Bermudas and only allow 24-feet high houses. Additionally, large residential lots were approved so.as to keep the number of structures.. to a minimum adjacent to Avenida Bermudas. The area of concern for aesthetic impacts is that area parallel to Avenida Bermudas, along Del Gato Drive. Proposed. Tentative Tract Map 28867 will create an additional 9 residential lots along Del Gato Drive, paralleling Avenida Bermudas, by reducing the width of existing lots. Two of these nine lots (between Lots 94 and 105) would be below street grade and still large enough that there would not be a detectable increase in the visual impact to the Coral Reef Mountains. The remaining seven additional lots (between Lots 50 and 68) along Del Gato Drive will be reduced in average width from 136-feet (Tract 28470, Lots 177 through.188) to 88 feet. These additional houses on smaller lots will increase the number of roofs that can have a 35% rood mass between 18 and 24 feet in height (Tradition Club Design Guidelines). This increase in the number of houses combined with the 35% roof massing will create an adverse visual impact of the view to the Coral Reef Mountains. The proposed additional lots within the interior of the proposed tentative tract are not anticipated to increase any adverse impact to views due to their distance from Avenida Bermudas. To mitigate the potentially negative impacts to the view of the mountains to the east of Avenida Bermudas; the Community Development Department had recommended that the seven new lots between Lots 50 and 68 be eliminated. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that Lots 50-and 68 be increased to a width of 100-feet instead of staff's recommendation. This recommendation by the Planning Commission will mitigate the visual impacts to a level of insignificance. 29 000435 047 B. Would the project modification have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. See discussion -in 3.13 A, above. C. Would the project modification create light or glare? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed additional lots would add exterior security and low level landscaping lighting which will cumulatively contribute to the existing light and glare in the City. All such lighting fixtures shall be required to comply with the Dark Sky Ordinance and other policies of the City, in order to reduce the impact. A lighting plan will be required to be submitted for review and approval for the proposed development. 3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting A portion of the prehistory of the La Quinta area is known through the archaeological record gained from various archaeological investigations over the past twenty years and from extensive ethnographic information. A discussion of the prehistory and history of La Quinta is provided in the Draft Historic Context Statement of the City of La Quinta. Other discussions are found in the La Quinta_ General Plan and the Master Environmental Assessment. Local Environmental Setting The Tradition project .site. is located in the southern portion of the City. There are recorded archaeological sites within a one mile radius of the project site as well as sites on the project site. The project site was previously surveyed for archaeological or historical resources, with both archaeological or historical sites recorded on the property. In 1984, the first archaeological investigation took .place on the project site in conjunction with a. similar proposed golf course/country club' project. This Phase I investigation was conducted by UCR ARU. Six - archaeological sites were recorded at that time. Local Native American consultation for.these sites was included in the analysis and determination of mitigation measures to be required for the sites. Mitigation for the .Tradition Club has been completed. A. Would the project modification disturb paleontological resources? Less Than Significant Impact. It is known that marine -associated paleontological resources are found at elevations below 42 feet abovermean sea level. The proposed project site is located at elevations ranging between 42 and 1600 feet above MSL. Thus, it was determined that the entire project site was just outside of the area designated by the Lakebed Paleontological Determination Study. The entire Tradition Club development has had archaeological monitoring,of the earth - moving activities, which provided for a contingency in the event that paleontological resources were uncovered as well (Source: Lakebed Paleontological Determination Study; Wilke 1984; UCR ARU M 000436 048 1986; Keith Companies, 1997). B. Would the project modification affect archaeological resources? Less Than Significant Impact. There are numerous archaeological sites within close proximity of the Tradition project. The archaeological survey conducted on the project site did locate and record six prehistoric archaeological sites. A discussion of these sites and their current status is provided in EA 96-333 and subsequent monitoring reports. All recommended mitigation for archaeological resources .has been completed (Source: Wilke 1984; UCR ARU 1986; Keith Companies, 1997). C. Would the project modification affect historical resources? No Impact. There are no historical resources located within the Tradition Club, but not within the proposed TTM 28867. D. Would the project modification have -the' potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic values? No Impact. There is no identifiable unique ethnic value to the proposed subdivision site. The project site has been part of a ranch that was first established in 1902. However, development of the property has been anticipated and promoted since the early 1980's. There are no unique ethnic. values identified with the property, other than local historic and prehistoric significance. E. Would the project modification restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? . No Impact. There are no known current religious uses or sacred uses on the proposed subdivision site. 3.15 RECREATION Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta has an adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan that assesses the existing resources and facilities and the future needs of the City. The City has approximately 28.7 acres of developed parkland for Quimby Act purposes. The 845 acre regional Lake Cahuilla Park is not included in this count. There are also unimproved bike and equestrian corridors within the City and designated pedestrian hiking trails. Local Environmental Setting The project site is former farm land with an historic house and out -buildings. There is no evidence that there have been any organized or approved recreational uses on the property. The Tradition Club includes an 18-hole golf course that provides recreation to the Tradition Club members. 31. 000437 049 A. Would the project modification increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed lot reconfiguration will cumulatively impact, in conjunction with -TTM 28470, the existing park and recreation facilities by the construction of 32 additional new residential lots. Park fees in lieu of parkland dedication will be 'required' for this project in order to mitigate this impact upon local parks. The Parks and Recreation Master Plan states that Planning Area C, within which the project site is located, is significantly deficient in park and recreation facilities. The paying of the parkland fee will assist in acquiring the necessary funds to develop future parks and other recreation facilities in Planning Area C (Sources: Parks and Recreation Master Plan): B. Would the project modification affect existing recreational opportunities? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed addition of 32 residential lots will affect existing parks and recreation facilities through added users. There is a significant deficit in existing parks in the northern area of the City. However, the Fritz B. Burns Park is located at the northwest corner of the Tradition Club development. The added users associated with the lot reconfiguration would not result in a significant increased demand upon the existing park facilities and recreational programs. Payment of.the parkland fee will mitigate this impact by contributing funds toward the construction of new park facilities and added recreational programs. SECTION 4: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFI AN The proposed subdivision (TTM 28867) will not have unmitigable significant adverse impacts on the environmental issues addressed in the checklist and addendum. Some of the issue areas could have a potential significant impact if appropriate mitigation measures are not implemented. The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings of significance set forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines and based on the results of this environmental assessment: • The proposed Tentative Tract Map 28867 will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract Map 28867 will not have the potential to achieve short term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract Map 28867 will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planning for proposed development in the immediate vicinity, and recommended mitigation measures. • The proposed Tentative Tract Map 28867 will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect human, either directly or indirectly, with the implementation. of recommended mitigation measures. 32 009438 050 SECTION 5• EARLIER ANALYSIS A. Earlier Analysis Used. Environmental Assessment 96-333 contains the environmental analysis for Tract 28470 as originally proposed. In addition, EA 92-240 was prepared in 1992, for Tentative Tract Map 27613. EA 92-240 assessed the potential_ impacts to the environment from the project proposed at that time. That project consisted of 399 residential units and an 18-hole golf course, and was known as The Traditions. Much of the general environmental information on resources and hazards assessed in 1992 is still valid for the current proposed project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified by the La Quinta City Council for that assessment. Also utilized in the current analysis was the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment (MEA), prepared in 1991, in conjunction with the 1992 General Plan Update and related EIR, and EA 96- 333 prepared for Tentative Tract Map 28470. The special studies prepared for the Tradition project consist of: . 1. Preliminary Soil Investigation of Tract 20328, La Quinta, California. November 1984. Buena Engineers, Inc. 2. Grading Plan Review,'Tract 20328, City of La Quinta, California. July 3, 1986. Leighton and Associates. 3. La Quinta Stormwater Project, Coachella Valley Water District - Design Report. April 1989. Bechtel Civil, Inc. 4. Update of Geotechnical Engineering Report: October 10, 1996.' Earth Systems Consultants. 5. Hydrology/Hydraulic Report for the Tradition Golf Course Project in the City of La Quinta, . Tentative. Tract 27613. October 1996. . Keith International, Inc. 6. An Archaeological Assessment of the Burns Ranch and Adjacent Properties, La. Quinta, Riverside County, California. Philip J. Wilke, Ph.D.,.June 1984. 7. . Archaeological Investigations at La,Quinta, Salton Basin, Southeastern California. Mark Q. Sutton and Philip J. Wilke, Editors. September 1986. 8. Acoustical Analysis: Tract 12480 [sic], City of La Quinta: Gordon Bricken & Associates, December 13, 1996. 9.1 USDA Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Coachella Valley. 1979. 10. Marshall Ranch/Hacienda del Gato Historic Resource Evaluation. Mellon and Associates. November 1996. 0 0 0 4 3 9 .. 33 051 11. Environmental Documents for the La Quinta Stormwater Project (File No. 0121.3198 and 0121.3198.1), Coachella Valley Water District. February 12, .1985. 12. Historic Resource Evaluation Report, The Old Avenue 52, City of La Quinta. Paul G. Chace, The Keith Companies, December 1996. B. Impacts Adequately Addressed. All potential impact/issue areas are considered to be adequately addressed with this environmental assessment. Certification of this EA by the City Council will confirm the adequacy of the environmental assessment. C. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures are discussed in this addendum as they relate to the proposed project.. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan containing these measures will be included as part of the Environmental Assessment and project conditions of approval. 000440 052 34 CITY OF LA QUINTA MONITORING PROGRAM FOR CEQA COMPLIANCE DATE: August 10, 1998 ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.: CASE NO.: TTM '28867 PROJECT STREET Tradition: Club ADDRESS: EAIEIR NO: 98-360 APPROVAL DATE. August 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Winchester Development Company, LLC 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 3.1 LAND USE & PLANNING No Impact: A, B, C, D, E OBJECTIVE: Ensure consistency with General Plan Density designation. Maintain Open Space in areas with 20% or greater slopes. MEASURE: None required by City. C.> U1 W 0 SUMMARY MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE . MEASURES. MONITORING CHECKED BY . 3.2 POPULATION & HOUSING Less than Significant Impact: A, C No Impact: B OBJECTIVE: To anticipate and plan for future population. ' J MEASURE: None required by City of La Quinta o o _ 0 CA ►ta 1 SUMMARY MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE MEASURES MONITORING - CHECKED BY 3..3 EARTH & GEOLOGY Less than Significant Impact:.F, H, No Impact: A, B, C, D, E, G, I OBJECTIVE: To reduce -the risk of structural collapse.from seismic events. To eliminate hazards or failure due to unstable soil conditions and construction preparation of building pads. MEASURE: B. All buildings shall be Public Works Department, Construction Phases. UBC constructed to current Uniform Community Development Building Code seismic requirements Department, Building & for Zone -III, and in compliance with Safety Department. the recommendations of project geotechnical reports. O O bob 096 1 J 7 J CA CA SUMMARY MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE. DATE MEASURES MONITORING CHECKED BY. 3.4 WATER Less than Significant Impacts: A, C, E, F, G, H, I. No Impact: B, D, G OBJECTIVE: To protect existing groundwater supplies. To reduce surface water pollution. MEASURE:. Comply with all requirements of the. CVWD, City of La Quinta Plan checking through Approved Drainage Coachella Valley Water District and on -going operations of Plan. City of La Quinta project. H. Implement best management Applicant Current best practices in order to minimize management practices. surface water pollution. 4 G� SUMMARY MITIGATION MEASURES RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CHECKED BY DATE 3.5 AIR QUALITY Potential Significant Unless Mitigated: A Less Than Significant, Impact: B, C, D OBJECTIVE: Maintain air quality and reduce potential impacts MEASURE: Compliance with air quality - AOMD; Public Works Construction Phases AQMD SEDAB mitigation measures of EA 96-333 Department, Community regulations; City's for TM 28470. Development Department. PM-10 Ordinance. . C CD «I� CJ1 SUMMARY. MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE MEASURES MONITORING CHECKED BY 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/ CIRCULATION Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated: A, C Less Than Significant Impact: B, D, E, F, . . No Impact: F, G OBJECTIVE: Maintain traffic safety and reduce traffic congestion MEASURE: A: Comply with all of the conditions Public Works Department, Construction and City of La Quinta of approval required for TTM 28867 Community Development operational phases. General Plan, and and TM 28470. Department Public Works Department criteria. O O O . Cn O CJ1 G�0 SUMMARY MITIGATION MEASURES RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CHECKED BY . DATE " 3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Less Than Significant Impact: A, B, C,D,E OBJECTIVE: Preserve and protect biological resources and habitat in Open Space, designated areas: MEASURE: None required by City. O . Q O O CJI CD SUMMARY MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE MEASURES MONITORING CHECKED BY 3.8 ENERGY & MINERAL RESOURCES No Impact: A, C Less Than Significant Impact: B OBJECTIVE: Preserve and protect energy and mineral resources. MEASURE: Comply with the City's Landscape Community Development Plan check and field City of La Quinta Water Conservation Ordinance. Department. inspections. UBC Building & Safety Comply with Title -24. Department. . } O ' C.7Ab O O� J SUMMARY MITIGATION MEASURES RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CHECKED BY DATE 3.9 HAZARDS Less Than Significant Impact: A, E No Impact: B, C, D OBJECTIVE: Identify, prevent, and reduce risks of upset and hazards to human health. MEASURE: Comply with Fire Marshal requirements and as approved by the City Council. Community Development Department, Fire Marshal ' Prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for any structure. Fire Code -77 1 SUMMARY MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE MEASURES MONITORING CHECKED BY . 3.10 NOISE Less Than Significant Impact: B Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated: A OBJECTIVE: Maintain ambient noise levels and reduce any significant noise. MEASURE: 1. Buildings constructed to ensure Building and Safety Dept. Plan check, construction City of La Quinta no more than 45dBA indoor. Community Development phases, on -going 2. Comply with Municipal Code Dept. operations. construction hours regulations. ' 0 rim L� O O Q� SUMMARY MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE MEASURES MONITORING CHECKED BY 3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES Less Than Significant Impact: A, E. Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated: B, C, D OBJECTIVE: To reduce impacts to public services. MEASURE: A. Compliance with Fire Marshal Fire Marshal Construction and Fire Marshal requirements. operational phases. C. Payment of state mandated Building & Safety Dept. Before Building Permit DSUSD Criteria school impact fees. issuance. City Departments City. of La Quinta D -& E payment of applicant, permit, fee schedules. and inspection fees. O O C.1'1 r O W SUMMARY MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE MEASURES MONITORING CHECKED BY 3.1.2 UTILITIES Less Than Significant Impact: B, C, D, E, F, G. Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated:.A OBJECTIVE: To reduce impacts upon electrical resources. To reduce impacts to domestic water and sanitation services. ' To provide adequate flood control facilities MEASURE: A. The applicant shall coordinate IID Prior to grading and .IID with IID for electrical -service for construction phases. the project. E. Compliance with CVWD and City CVWD, City of La Quinta CVWD, City of La requirements. Quinta J CD r� we 4�b ID SUMMARY MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE MEASURES MONITORING CHECKED BY 3.13 AESTHETICS Potentially: Significant Unless Mitigated: A, B, C OBJECTIVE: To reduce impacts to the aesthetic quality of life from light or glare. Maintain architectural compatibility with historical structures in resort complex. Preserve views of the local mountains. MEASURE: C. All lighting fixtures shall comply Community Development .Grading & Construction La Quinta General, with the Dark Sky Ordinance. Department phases. Plan and MEA; Tradition Club B. 'Comply with recommendations Community Development Architectural of TTM 28867. Department, Public Works/ Guidelines; TTM Engineering Department 28867• CD CD CD V� W J SUMMARY MITIGATION MEASURES RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CHECKED BY DATE 3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES Less Than Significant Impact: A, B, . No Impact: C, D, E _ OBJECTIVE: To reduce impacts to important cultural resources. - MEASURE: None required by City: O O O ►A. CSi n n SUMMARY. MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE MEASURES MONITORING CHECKED BY 3.15 RECREATION Less Than Significant Impact: A, B OBJECTIVE: Reduce impacts to local public parks and recreation facilities. MEASURE: Compliance with mitigation Community *Development Prior to issuance of City Parks and measures in EA 96-333 for TM Department; Building Permits Recreation Master. 28470. Parks & Recreation Plan. Department O O L7 UT 0 I N LD 0 W w x r� r� c ril d z 0 rn 0 W P Ir LO r co ro m EAR �' I Arcliitecauial. `;�<indstrd;= ��qq EASEMENTS UNI�iVF pEvE�y' PM:NT OF:P, APPROVED PAD ELEVATIONS i FnT.MEN 1. Front property lines are located at the inside race of the All sites have been assigned a finish grade elevation that has street curb. From this inside face of the street cui-b been approved by the City of La Quinta and referred to as the inward five feet (5') is' reserved as the easement area. for `approved pad elevation'. By City Ordinance, no additional utilities. This easement area remains the responsibility of fill material shall be placed on the lot to raise the approved the Owner to landscape and maintain..- pad elevation. The height of the house (the finished.height of , 2. Each site is reserved with underground electricity, TV each house is measured from the approved 'pad elevation).' m cable, telephone, sewer, -gas line, and water line. The However, selective areas within a house can be lowered or location of these utilities within the easement should be raised to create a more interesting floor plan, Pool and confirmed in the field when a topographic survey of the garden areas may be sunken to provide for privacy and lot is prepared. Utility locations are approximately design interest, however provisions for drainage must be marked on the curb. addressed. 3. All utility company pull boxes, transformers, etc —have been located within the easement in a manner that will 1. Any alterations to approved pad elevations are subject to accommodate future planting and grading to diminish City of La Quinta approval. their visual impact. They shall be leveled and graded 2. All lots must meet existing natural grade -with the around to provide positive drainage. adjacent golf course and must be contoured to maintain70 o 4. The ADRC will individually review all. improvements continuity with contiguous lots. planned for inclusion over easements held by public 3. Any changes in slope affecting the golf course will be agencies as well as the Tradition Community. Easements reviewed and must be approved by the golf course that are located on custom sites include, but are not superintendent. limited to, water lines, irrigation lines, sewers and storm drain lines that serve Tradition Community BUILDING AND RoUF HEIGHTS improvements. Locations of these easements are found on the corresponding tract map for the -subdivision. Irrigation lines may need to be' verified by survey if not The architect is encouraged to design the residence house to indicated on respective Tract Maps. conform to the existing grades and alloNirable height j. e. ... .. ...... ... .:.:... ...... VGIiF/lu irJliiV4ili319. iGi lilt. !JliiWi111L11L V2 luilulil allc ......... _.. G1GYclllUlll Vl UIG DOPle sLIG. itGCUglll'LIIIg anal one resiaence improvements within areas may be in effect. The Owner home may have several levels, the elevation of the highest or his/her design consultants should check with the point of the roof structure must not exceed twenty-four feet ADRC office to detennine this. (24') for all lots as measured from approved pad elevation. The maximum amount of roofing that can project between 1.8' - 24' above approved pad elevation is 3517o. All other roof J� m elements muststay below an eighteen foot height linut. � Tradition Community Architectural Design Guidelines 1$ _n 0 Architectural Standards LO No roof mounted equipment will be allowed with the i Each home shall have a minimum two car garage with a (1 w exception of satellite dishes as defined under " exterior minimum size of twenty feet by twenty feet (20' x 20) materials" (item .1.4 in these guidelines). All placements of inside clear. The garage must be attached to the main r design features shall be submitted to the ADRC- for approval residence and . be an integral part of the design of the f' N during the design development stage. Chimney height and overall project. Guest houses will be allowed as permitted �n LO other projections required by building codes will be by local building requirements and must contain a examined on a case by case basis. minimum of 350 square feet of conditioned space. Two story structures are not allowed. All units shall be CrI limited to one level above the approved pad elevation. �-LDINO `En�U_A MINIMUM FLOOR AREA AND 1. Custom Home Sites T Q�, COVERAGE No part of the dwelling may protrude outside the building L set back lines and specific building Iimits as approved by r� the Committee. This includes such items as roof d l . Custom Home Sites &Villa Sites overhangs, architectural details , an ° aJr/ors nLedAall details at openings Covered patios, lli - '� ' ��?'=�4 The minimum floor area of each dwelling shall be 3000 .., an�open roo structures aril be considered as part of ing.. 0 1 o square feet for all custom homesites of greater than 17000 -0 5� square feet and 2000 square feet of living area on villa A. Front Yards: Z� m M 1%4 M sites of less than 17000 square feet. This area shall be ca i1T<o c� enclosed entirely within the: building set back limitations • twenty-five feet (25') from the front property line m.f cZ. LO specified and shall not include the area enclosed for . thirty feet (30') for garage doors facing the street. �o m garages, porches, patios, terraces; atriums and other • twenty-five feet (25' ) for garages doors ttit?lerl co C� similar areas. away from the street. "'-�-'� • at street side yards a minimum set back of fifteen feet (15') from property line (main entrance must iiu; ;ui wi Ewe �vjill A-0ac Yaj'ti SuLoack not street The maximum lot coverage shall not exceed forty percent side yard set back) (40%) of total gross lot. area. Lot coverage shall also conform to City of Ca Quinta standards as approved for B. Rear Yards: .I this land use. Lot coverage shall be calculated on the . ro basis of total conditioned living space plus enclosed. . thirty feet (30') for walls with windows from rear m Ln garage and utility spaces. (Refer to Exhibit 11) ;! al Tradition Community Architectural Design Guidelines n 17 '^ SITE PLAN,.tiYa ui U- 54.00 FEET 150. FEET FROM AVENIDA FMAY 80.4 0 0-0 LLJ z M Go C.4 >I :�, I :0 LL 0 i LL .0 L) (L U 0.0 0, w CIO > z 0 cr OI U; < ;LLJ cn I-- -j In w -J uj 01to w F- IQ LU ui 17 FEET HEIGHTILIMIT 0 UJI (D uj M, ,ol•IM1,1111111il Mill INN ui C"* . ui ui LL! LL F i1q, =LqF�lfl ; PRO . POSED RESIDENCE (a) 53 600-DEL GATO DRIVE A -A AVENIDA BERMUDAS AN.D DEL GATO DRIVE CROSS SECTION 37 FEET DEL GATO DRIVE RIGHT OF WAY SCALE .1"=60' NOTE: - - SEE SHEET 2 FOR SURVEYOR'S NOTES 0 30 60 120 180 AND BASIS OF BEARING 13qtG od •�9r a6•sr e•Js -er BERMUDAS 1!1 0 ^ co m a ro � v QQ l!1 V r� M • � o Ca 4.. O _• C . C� INC o� V7 LtJ � 4] Q � CV ti CV. ms m d I � Mit, 1101, 1 o i IL66710 : um o m � w m I t J H W � 2 H W W LL N N APPROVED PAD 154.00 FEET i - Cr M `o th ,4 �n ri� ^ ^ v Ul J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. � ,�.. �a � .... .�� .�. �;, �_„ • :vas .■ ��J a - A V/ W W L •IY.W - JL - - - - -. - - - - .- .. w - -J07; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OT03'5ff E 111_ - N OT03�Q €1115� 0T0.j.'S0' E 111 2 E ; + + a + ` _ _ _ - - LOT 96 ` + `6$ ' 146.71T1' 145.3 ++ � �+ (PE=139) �. =150LOT 9 � � ExISnrIG LOT UlvEs (Y') �., [PE =143.9] 1 PER TENTATIVE TRACT 2i3470-1 42 � PE' - 145. N i )7= 0' PU [Pf= ��45.� -� �+ (PE=143) it 9LOT 101 Z 4-� _ LOT �8LOT 102 PE = 150 CfJ� 9 PE = 1;40 48+ '�(PE=145) LOT 103 PE - 152 --� ;LOT 100 PE = 154 S I 1 Pr 1 4 N P E = 149 xiSnN T UNES (rYP) �l E=147) Ew (P E=153) PER TENT TRACT 28470- N ++1 µ �4 d'g 9s- t 0 (PE=155) (PE=151 1 X N 070YW E 111.52' w I +, \ i L \J N14fS.3TE917T N 1 1 io Eue (PE- 49) (PE 48) ,► , _ 1 t M OZOW 'M 7691 '32' E if9u.. i D 07 ' w' LOT 104 PE = 1 .�P (PE=156) {r F 97.2Y L*21.52' MACH. L1rA TION 2g+50 SEE SMET 3 Underground Service Alert wpm Call: TOLL FREE ,�,.. ` 1--800 SCALE 1'=40' D 422-4133 ir 1- 9 0 20 40 80 120 TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG BENCHMARK: BASIS OF BEARINGS: RN. CO. BENCHMARK 103-3-70, TOP THE BEARINGS HEREON ARE BASED OF CONC. FILLED 1' I.P. f 350' UPON THE WEST LINE OF THE SW N'LY OF OLD AVE. 52 AND 30' E'LY 1 /4 OF SEC. 7, T6S, R7E, SBM, OF CL OF WASHINGTON AVE., 6' S-LY AS SHOWN ON A RECORD OF SURVEY, OF POWER POLE #989270 ELI.0.11. RS 67/76, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CAUFORNIA, BEING N00'O6'08" E CONSTRUCTION NOTES CONSTRUCT S' AC PAVROff OVER 4-1/2• CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE. ® NN00 200 �IODIFl&"AS SHO !N DEfAiL 0N�5 STANDARD w N ts'15 E 573g' 1 N 07;T W // �1d C� 14 0 a UB z GA70 DRIVE CENTERLINE DATA TA RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT , - DEL NO. BEARING DEL 17 N88W5SW 101.06' 18 D=95'S9 O 200.00' 335M 222.10' 19 N07'0YW E ---- 381.44' --- 20 D-25'20%T 500.W 221.11' 112.39' 21 D=18'22'2T 50OW 160ZV 80.87' 22 N00'O6'05'E --- 193.13' - 23 D;G357T 1500.00' 172.56' 86 38' DEL GATO DRIVE CURB DATA NO. BEARING TA RADIUS LENGTH TANGENT N88'S5'I --- 101.06' --- D=W59'4,1 182.00' 304.93' 202.17 D-95'59'43' 218.00' 36524' 242-W 9 NOT03-d'E --- 381.44' --- N07'03'Sd'E --- 381.44' --- 4 D-252D'1Y 518.00' 229.0r 116.44' 4 D-W20'13- 482.00' 213.15' 108.34' D=1822'26' 482.00' 154.57' 77.95' 44 D=18'22'21r 518.00' 166.12' 83.7W N00�06'03'E --- 193.13' --- t�0'06'03'E -- 193.13' --- 4 D-OG3YV 1482.00' 170.49' 85-4' D=06'35'29' 1518.00' 174.63' 87.41' PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: C I T Y O F L A Q U I N T A DESIGN: DRAFT: RpFESS/0�, KRIS R. SCHULZE DATE: RCE NO. 46188 EXP. DATE 12/31 /2002 w No. 45188 rn APPROVED BY CITY OF LA 4UINTA' E* 12/31/02 /S�� sT CIVIL Engineering KEITH -Architecture TRADITION TRACT 887 ' --- INTERNATIONAL —Architecture CHECK: DATE: ` DEL GATO DRIVE. STA , 29+5Q TO STA 44+00 . INC. -Construction �, 99 � � - ROUGH GRADING y PALM DESERT DIVISION mOr"ement . q a1-865 eaAROWax • SURE 101 =PAL►+ DESERT, CA . 92211 A PORTION OF SEC 6 & SEC 7, T.6S., R.7E., � SBM DWG No. ST256404 �' C RIS A. VOGT, P.E. DATE: OF CALF (619) 346-9844 • FAX (619) 346-9368 FOR: T T T r� �r RCE NO. 44250 EXP. DATE 06/30/01 _ TRADITION CLUB ASSOCIATES, ES L.L.C. SHEET 4 ©F 15 I i