Loading...
SP 2003-066 & EA 2003-481 Pavilion at La Quinta - NOD (2003)*1A STATE OF LOFF FIH RESOURCES AGENCY DEPARTMENT ISAND GAME ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT�3 Lead Agency: CITY OF LA QUINTA County Agency of Filing: Riverside Project Title: EA 2003-481; SP 2003-066; THOMAS ENTERPRISES Project Applicant Name: CITY OF LA QUINTA Project Applicant Address: 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO LA QUINTA CA 92253 Project Applicant: Local Public Agency CHECK APPLICABLE FEES: ❑ Environmental Impact Report ❑X Negative Declaration ❑ Application Fee Water Diversion (State Water Resources Control Board Only) ❑ Project Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs X❑ County Administration Fee ❑ Project that is exempt from fees (DeMinimis Exemption) ❑ Project that is exempt from fees (Notice of Exemption) Total Received Signature and title of person receiving payment: Notes: Receipt# 200301108 Date: 10/28/2003 Document No: 200301108 Phone Number: 760-777-7125 1250.00 $64.00 1314.00 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION To: Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento CA 95814 X County Clerk County of Riverside 2724 Gateway Drive Riverside CA 92501-3801 From: CITY OF LA QUINTA P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta CA 92253 Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21 152 of the Public Resources Code. Project Title: Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and Specific Plan 2003-066, Thomas Enterprises State Clearinghouse Number (If submitted to Clearinghouse) N. A. Lead Agency Contact Person Area Code/Telephone/Extension Stan Sawa 760-777-7125 Project Location (include County): Northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street, in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside Project Description: 175,200 shopping center on 17.4 acres in CR zone district. This is to advise that the City of La Quinta has approved the above described project on October 7,2003, as ( X Lead Agency Responsible Agency), and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1 . The project [_will X will not] have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures [ X were were not] made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [ was X was not] adopted for this project. 5. Findings [X were _ were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Environmental Documents (EA 2003-481), with any comments, responses and record of project approval, are available to the General Public at: City of La Quinta, Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico, P.O. Box 1504, La Quinta, CA 92253 M Name/Signature (Public Agency) Date received for filing at OPR: [FRIVERSIL F. 0 DCOUNTY OCT 2 8 2003 GARY L. ORSO By Ma, ll I T.'Deputy COUNTY CLERK Neg Declarato / R C 2j j 5 nation Filed per POSTED OCT 2 8 2003 tn1 Removed l33 UoP€. By ,: . County o ots , -ate at Calitof11i� NOTICE OF DETERMINATION To: Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento CA 95814 X County Clerk County of Riverside 2724 Gateway Drive Riverside CA 92501-3801 From: CITY OF LA QUINTA P. 0. Box 1504 La Quinta CA 92253 Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Project Title: Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and Specific Plan 2003-066, Thomas Enterprises State Clearinghouse Number (If submitted to Clearinghouse) Lead Agency Contact Person_ Area Code/Telephone/Extension N.Y.. Stan Sawa 760-777-7125 Project Location (include County): Northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street, in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside Project Description: 175,200 shopping center on 17.4 acres in CR zone district. This is to advise that the City of La Quinta has approved the above described project on October 7,2003, as ( X Lead Agency Responsible Agency), and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1 . The project [_will X will not] have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures [ X were —were not] made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [_ was X was not] adopted for this project. 5. Findings [X were were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Environmental Documents (EA 2003-481), with any comments, responses and record of project approval, are available to the General Public at: City of La Quinta, Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico, P.O. Box 1504, La Quinta, CA 92253 O -- NamefSiynature (Public Agency) Bate Title Date received for filing at OPR: [FICOUNTY OCT 2 8 2003 GARY L. ORSO By L,"of� .,�,a' Q T. Marshall Deputy Neg Decla ation/Ntc Determination Filed per P. R.C. 21152 POSTED OCT 2 g 2003 Removed: By. County of Riverside, State of California e NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION To: County Clerk From: County of Riverside 0 L IE D City of La Quinta Attention: Cherrie Seager RIVERSIDE COUNTY Attention: Jerry D. Herman 2724 Gateway Drive P.O. Box 1504/78-495 Calle Tampico Riverside, CA 92501-3801 SEP 0 3 2003 La Quinta, CA 92253 Subject: GARY L. ORSO By �M,-„�,�.e T. Marshall The City of La Quinta intends to adopt a MitigaRgfyNegative Declaration with respect to the project more fully described herein. Project Title: Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and Specific Plan 2003-066 (The Pavilion at La Quinta) State Clearinghouse Number Lead Agency/Contact Person Telephone Number None City of La Quinta/Stan Sawa (760) 777-7125 Project Location: Northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street, within the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside. Project Description: Specific Plan to allow 175,200 square foot shopping center, consisting of five structures No effects on the environment are anticipated that cannot be reduced to a level of insignificance as a result of this project; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The Initial Study/Environmental Assessment and all documents referenced therein along with the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration are available for review and copying at the Community Development Department at the City of La Quinta located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253 on weekdays, from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. The public is invited to comment on the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration during the public review period beginning on August 29, 2003, and ending on October 7, 2003. Planning Commission Hearing_ The La Quinta Planning Commission will consider the project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a public hearing (fill in one): Ali On September 9, 2003, to be held at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. ❑ Yet to be determined. Please call (760) 777-7125 to obtain more information. City Council Hearing_ The La Quinta City Council will consider the project and the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a public hearing (fill in one): 1 On October 7, 2003, to be held at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. ❑ Yet to be determined. Please call (760) 777-7125 to obtain m"9'&L0Rn. Mfg Declaration/Ntc Determination By/Title: Stan Sawa, Principal Planner Date: August 25, 20U:S Filed per P.R.C. 21152 SEP SEP 0 3 2003 Removed: X003 By: m tp�-ept. P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\sp2003-066 noi.wpd Counly of Riverside, State of California PROOF OF TRANSMISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE I am employed by the City of La Quinta in the County of Riverside, State of California. I am over the age of 18. My business address is 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92553. On August 25, 2003, 1 transmitted the NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION to: County Clerk County of Riverside Attention: Cherrie Seager 2724 Gateway Drive Riverside, CA 92501-3801 0 (BY MAIL) I caused the Notice to be placed in an envelope with the above - referenced address, with postage thereon fully prepaid to be placed in the United States mail at La Quinta, California. 0 (BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY) I caused the Notice to be placed in an envelope to be delivered to an overnight delivery carrier with delivery fees provided for, addressed to the person listed above. Executed on August 25, 2003, at La Quinta, California. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. BETTY J. SAWYER (Type or print name) P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\sp2003-066 noi.wpd (Signature) FILE COPY RESOLUTION NO. 2003=100 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 7' day of October, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider this request by THOMAS ENTERPRISES for Environmental Assessment 2003-481 for Specific Plan 2003-066 which allows construction of a 175,200 square foot shopping center at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street, more particularly described as: APN's: 649-020-043, -063, -064, and -065, WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment 2003-481 has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2003-481) and has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of this Assessment and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration oi Environmental Impact should be certified; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on the 9"' day of September, 2003, did consider this ' request, and recommended to the City Council, certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 2003-066; and, WHEREAS, on July 31, 2003, the Community Development Department mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for t eir review and comment on the proposed project. All written comments are o file with the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the .— Public Hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on September 16, 2003, for the City Council meeting as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public Hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and Resolution No. 2003-100 Environmental Assessment2003-481 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7, 2003 Paye 2 WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did make the following findings to justify certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either directly, or indirectly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2003- 481. 2. The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number, or restrict the range of rare, or endangered plants, or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends in that mitigation measures are imposed on the project that will reduce impacts to less than significant levels. 4. The proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned, or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project. 6. The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment in that mitigation measures are imposed on the project that will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Revolution No. 2003-100 Emi orwnerital Assessment2003-481 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7. 2003 Paye 3 I 8. The City Council has considered Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and said Assessment reflects the independent judgment of the City. 9. The City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct, and constitute the findings of the City Council for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2003-481 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Mitigation Monitoring Plan on file in the Community Development Department and attached hereto (Exhibit "A"). 3. That Environmental Assessment 2003-481 reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED ° at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 7' day of October, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Henderson, Osborne, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Adolph NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Resolution No. 2003-100 Environmental Assessment2003-481 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 4 IF_ I ( IIAKKI - ON AD0 PH,yor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: 114 JU S. GREEK, CMC, Cit lerk City of La Quinta, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KAT ERINE JENS CitAt#omey City of La Quinta, California RESOLUTION 2003-100 ADOPTED: OCTOBER 7, 2003 f Environmental Checklist Form Environmental Assessment 2003-481 1. Project title: Specific Plan 03-066 2. Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quanta, CA 92253 3. Contact person and phone number: Stan Sawa 760-777-7125 4. Project location: Northeast comer of Adams Street and Highway 111 APN: 649-020-043,649-020-063,-064,-065 EXHIBIT "A" 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Thomas Enterprises 73-333 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 100 Palm Desert, CA 92260 6: General plan designation: Regional Commercial 7. Zoning: Regional Commercial 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including 'but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Specific Plan to establish the design standards and guidelines for a commercial center to include up to 175,200 square feet of retail and restaurant space, located within one central building and 4 smaller building pads. The smaller building pads are to be adjacent to Highway 111, and range from 3,500 to 9,000 square feet. The primary structure, to be located along the northern boundary of the site, totals 154,800 square feet, and is envisioned to contain both anchor stores and in-line shops. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Vacant, World Gym and Future post office, Coachella Valley Channel South: Highway 111, Auto Center West: Regional Commercial, including gas station and Wal-Mart East: Vacant, Regional Commercial 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) r--- Coachella Valley Water District CalTrans SACity Clerk\ResolutionAres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -l- ENVIRONMENTAL FAQ. FORS POTENTIALLY ,Y AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,'involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Biological Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities / Service Systems Agriculture Resources Cultural Resources Hydrology / Water Quality Noise Recreation Air Quality Geology /Soils Land Use / Planning Population / Housing Transportation/Traffic Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by, the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation:' I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, X there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A NMGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL lIVIPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature September 2. 2003 Date P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 0361 checklist.dx -2- 012 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A'No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead SACity Clerk\ResolutionAres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -3- agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan Exhibit 3.6) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Aerial photograph) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant impact Impact Mitigation Impact X X X X I. a) & b) The project site is located within the Highway 111 Image Corridor. The project's landscaping along Highway 111 will be required to include the specific design standards included in the "Highway 111 Design Theme," including its plant palette and design standards, particularly for setbacks. The current plant palette provided in the Specific Plan does not include these standards. This design reduction will not provide the high level of aesthetics mandated in the General Plan for this primary corridor through the City, and will result in a "choppy" or inconsistent approach to landscaping within the Highway 111 corridor. In order to assure that the project provides the level of aesthetic amenities expected in the General Plan for the Highway 111 corridor, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1. The plant palette (Table 2) in the Specific Plan shall be amended to include only those plant materials prescribed in the "Highway 111 Design Theme." The project proponent may, at his/her discretion, provide a second plant palette for plant materials outside the landscaped setback on Highway 111. SACity ClerMesolutionsVes 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -4- 2. The landscaping along the entire frontage of Highway 111 shall be installed with the first phase of project development. t" I. c) The proposed project includes a very large main building or buildings (attached) totaling over 154,000 square feet, and potentially as long as 720 feet. The Specific Plan depicts the north elevations for this building with no articulation or architectural detail, and with a number of loading docks (see Figure #7), which will have a potentially significant aesthetic impact on both commercial buildings and residential land uses to the north. Of particular concern is both the lack of aesthetic applied to this side of the project, and the need to assure that in the long term, this side of the project will not become visually blighted. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. The Specific Plan shall be amended as follows: a. Architectural elevations shown in Figures 16 to 21 shall be amended to reflect improvements to the north side elevations consistent with the architectural style of the facades of the building(s). b. The text of the Specific Plan, under Section "Architectural Guidelines" shall be amended to include a discussion of the importance of architectural details on all building elevations, and particularly on the "back of house" elevations on the north side of the site. C. The Specific Plan shall be amended to include, under Section "Architectural Guidelines," a requirement for screened and/or sunken loading docks, to assure that the visual impacts of these facilities is minimized. The implementation of these mitigation measures will assure that aesthetic impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. I. d) The project will generate light from parking lot and security lighting. The project will be required, however, through the Site Development Permit process, to demonstrate that the lighting on the site will remain contained to the site, in conformance with the City's lighting ordinance. In addition, this ordinance requires that all lighting be directed downwards, and be shielded, to assure that the security lighting on the north side of the site does not impact the adjacent land uses. The implementation of these standards will assure that the impacts associated with light and glare will be less than significant. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -5- II. a) -c) The project site is vacant desert land and is not in agriculture. Lands surrounding the project site are planned, and partially developed in regional commercial land uses. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the properties, nor on properties in the immediate vicinity. No impacts to agriculture will result with development of the proposed project. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -6- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the pE2iecV a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique X Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? (General Plan EIR p. III -21 ff.) b) Conflict with existing zoning for X agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (No ag. land in proximity to project site) II. a) -c) The project site is vacant desert land and is not in agriculture. Lands surrounding the project site are planned, and partially developed in regional commercial land uses. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the properties, nor on properties in the immediate vicinity. No impacts to agriculture will result with development of the proposed project. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -6- 7— III. a), b) & c) The City's primary source of pollution is the automobile. The proposed project includes the development of up to 175,200 square feet of commercial retail space which will generate approximately 12,895 daily trips at the site'. Based on this traffic generation, and an average trip length of 15 miles, the following emissions can be expected to be generated from the project site. Based on Table IV -1, of "La Quints Corporate Centre Traffic Impact Study," prepared by Endo Engineering, May 1999, and assuming 158.4 thousand s.f. commercial retail and 9.0 thousand s.f. restaurant, categories 820 and 832. S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -7- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any air quality standard or X contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, 2002 PM10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) III. a), b) & c) The City's primary source of pollution is the automobile. The proposed project includes the development of up to 175,200 square feet of commercial retail space which will generate approximately 12,895 daily trips at the site'. Based on this traffic generation, and an average trip length of 15 miles, the following emissions can be expected to be generated from the project site. Based on Table IV -1, of "La Quints Corporate Centre Traffic Impact Study," prepared by Endo Engineering, May 1999, and assuming 158.4 thousand s.f. commercial retail and 9.0 thousand s.f. restaurant, categories 820 and 832. S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -7- Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout — (paunds per dam— ----- Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Pollutant Ave. Trip Length (miles) Total miles/day 12,895 x 15 — 193,425. PM10 PM10 PM10 ROC CO NOX Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wear Grams at 50 mph 17,408.25 452,614.50 92,844.00 - 1,934.25 1,934.25 Pounds at 50 mph 38.43 - 999.15 204.95 - 4.27 4.27 SCAQMD Threshold (lbs./day) 75 550 _ 100 _150 Assumes 12,895 ADT. Based on California Air Resources Board's EMFAC7G Emissions Model. Assumes Year 2005 summertime running conditions at 75T, ligbt du autos, catal ic. As demonstrated above, the proposed project will exceed SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds for both carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxides. The potential impacts of the proposed project were analysed in the General Plan EIR, as the land use proposed is consistent with the Regional Commercial land use designation. The City found at that time that although the potential impacts associated with air quality in the City could be considerable, the potential benefits of buildout of the General Plan outweighed these potential impacts, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations was prepared and adopted in conjunction with the certification of the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR included a number of mitigation measures to assist the City and project developers in reducing potential impacts associated with air quality. In order to lower the potential impacts associated with air quality emissions, mitigation measures have been provided below. The City and Coachella Valley are a severe non -attainment area for PM10 (Particulates of 10 microns or less). The Valley's 2002 PM10 Plan adopted much stricter measures for the control of dust both during the construction process and during project operations.These measures will be integrated into conditions of approval for the proposed project. These include the following control measures. CONTROL MEASURE TITLE & CONTROL METHOD BCM -1 Further Control of Emissions from Construction Activities : Watering, chemical stabilization, wind fencing, revegetation, track -out control BCM -2 Disturbed Vacant Lands: Chemical stabilization, wind fencing, access restriction, revegetation BCM -3 Unpaved Roads and Unpaved Parking Lots: Paving, chemical stabilization, access restriction, revegetation BCM -4 Paved Road Dust: Minimal track -out, stabilization of unpaved road shoulders, clean streets maintenance SACity ClerMesolutionsVes 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -8- The proposed project will generate dust during construction. Under mass grading conditions, this could result in the generation of 461.5 pounds per day, for a limited period while grading operations are active. The contractor will be required to submit a PM 10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the measures below. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on-site power generation. 3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site. 5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on- going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 7. Any area which remains undeveloped for a period of more than 30 days shall be stabilized using either chemical stabilizers or a desert wildflower mix hydroseeded on the affected portion of the site. 8. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. Parkway landscaping on both Adams Street and Highway 111 shall be installed immediately following mass grading of the site. 9. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction - related dirt on approach routes to the site. 10. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour 11. The project proponent shall notify the City and SCAQMD of the start and end of grading activities in conformance and within the time frames established in the 2002 PM10 Management Plan. 12. Any business on the proposed project site which employs 100 or more persons shall be required to implement the standards and conditions of the City's Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -9- 13. The project proponent shall coordinate the location of a bus stop adjacent to the project site with Sunline Transit, and shall construct the bus stop and amenities (shelter, trash cans, benches, etc.) to Sunline and City standards. 14. All applicable mitigation measures contained in the General Plan EIR shall be applied to the proposed project during both construction and operation. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -10- SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -11- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, X either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on X any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) d) Interfere substantially with the X movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) f) Conflict with the provisions of an X adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other a roved local, regional, or state SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -11- habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 fl) IV. a) -f) The proposed project site is currently vacant desert land. Biological resource analyses have been conducted in the past for portions of the project site'. There are no species of concern identified for this property in the City's General Plan. The project site is within the mitigation fee area for the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard. The site has been impacted by off-site construction and dumping in the past, and is isolated due to surrounding development. The site is likely habitat for common desert flora and fauna, which will be lost at the time the site develops. However, the City's requirements for desert tolerant landscaping will result in, the planting of materials which will be habitat for these species upon project buildout. The impacts associated with biological resources are expected to be less than significant. 2 James Cornett, "Giant Sand Treader Cricket Survey and Habitat Analysis," July 15, 1999 SACity ClerklResolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woe -12- V. CULTURAL RESOUKCt; -- the nroiect: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in'l5064.5? ("Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel l I l Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2,1999.) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? ("Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel 111 Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999.) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ("General Plan Exhibit 6.8) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? "Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel 111 Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999.) Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w! Significant Impact Impset I Mitigation I Impact X X 1:1 X V. a), b) & d) Cultural resource surveys have previously been completed fdr the proposed project site'. The surveys and site investigations identified significant resources on portions of the project site. Site CA-RIV-6190 was found not to constitute a significant resource, and no further action is required on this site. A portion of Site CA -RN -2936, however, was found to be significant. Two potential mitigation measures were offered for the historic site: to either fully excavate the site, or to cover the site and protect it from further disturbance. The City determined that, in conformance with CEQA, Section 15126.4(b)(3), preservation in place is the preferred mitigation measure (also see Staff Report and Minutes, Historic Preservation Commission, August 19, 1999). However, the Historic Preservation Commission determined that excavation of the site should occur as recommended by the archaeological testing and evaluation reportprepared by CRM TECH. An interim Phase III data recovery report was completed in December, 1999, and accepted by the HPC in January, 2000, subject to submission of a final report. The site is also to be monitored during earth moving activities to ensure that any additional resources 3 "Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel 111 Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part J.doc -13- potentially uncovered are appropriately studied. The following mitigation measures shall therefore be implemented: 1. The final report for the Phase III data Recovery for the Historic Site on CA-RIV- 2936, including artifact laboratory analysis shall be submitted to and be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) prior to issuance of first building permit for project (Required by HPC on January 6, 2000). 2. An archaeological monitor shall be present during grubbing, grading, trenching or other earth moving activity on or off the project site. The archaeologist shall be empowered to stop or redirect earth moving activities. The archaeologist shall file a report with the Community Development Department immediately following completion of earth moving activities, on the findings at the site. V. c) The site is outside the historic lakebed for ancient Lake Cahuilla, and is therefore not expected to contain resources. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -14- r— VI. a) i), iii), iv), b) -e) The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it subject to landslides or liquefaction. The soil in the area is not expansive, and would support septic tanks. The proposed project will have no impact on these geologic hazards. VI. a) ii) The City and project site will be subject to significant ground shaking in the event of significant seismic activity. The City Building Department has implemented California SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -15- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, X as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (MEA Exhibit 6.2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA X Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? (General Plan Exhibit 8.2) iv) Landslides? (General Plan Exhibit 8.3) X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? (General Plan Exhibit 8.4) d) Be located on expansive soil, as X defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (General Plan Exhibit 8.1) e) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (General Plan Exhibit 8.1) VI. a) i), iii), iv), b) -e) The project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it subject to landslides or liquefaction. The soil in the area is not expansive, and would support septic tanks. The proposed project will have no impact on these geologic hazards. VI. a) ii) The City and project site will be subject to significant ground shaking in the event of significant seismic activity. The City Building Department has implemented California SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -15- Building Codes which is intended to lower the potential impacts associated with groundshaking to less than significant levels. In addition, no critical facilities will be built at the site. The structures will be required to implement the most recent building codes in place at the time of construction. Site specific studies prepared for the subject property, and reviewed for the proposed project, include construction standards which will be implemented by the City Engineer during review of the project grading and building plans 4 Impacts associated with groundshaking are expected to be less than significant. Letter report, Sladden Engineering, dated August 19, 2003. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -16- SACity ClerklResolutionAres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woo -17- Potentially Significant Impact Ixss Than Gess Than No siguifucant rvl significant Impact Mitigation Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: a) Create a significant hazard to the X X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application materials) b) Create a. significant hazard to the X public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application materials) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application materials) d) Be located on a site which is included X on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or -public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or X physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 fl) SACity ClerklResolutionAres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woo -17- h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) VII. a) -h) The proposed project will. result in the construction of commercial and retail space. Should any of these businesses store or transport hazardous substances, they will be heavily regulated by regional and state agencies. These agencies will impose conditions of approval and monitor the businesses to assure that the applicable standards are implemented. Impacts associated with hazardous materials are therefore expected to be less than significant. The site is not located within the vicinity of an airport or airstrip, nor is it subject to wildland fires. SACity ClerMPtesolutionslres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -18- SACity ClerMesolutionAres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Ldoc -19- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the ro'ect: a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? (General Plan EIR p.111-187 ff.) b) Substantially deplete groundwater X supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? (General Plan EIR p.III-187 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) d) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? (Project Giading, Site Hydrology) e) Create or contribute runoff water X which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) f) Place housing within a 100 -year flood X hazard area as ma d on a federal Flood SACity ClerMesolutionAres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Ldoc -19- Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6) g) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard X area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6) VIII. a) & b) The construction of commercial space will not significantly impact water supply, nor will it violate water or wastewater requirements. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's water efficient landscaping and construction provisions, which will ensure that the least amount of water is utilized within the buildings. The Coachella Valley Water District will impose conditions of approval for the treatment of wastewater from the facilities constructed on the project site. The applicant will also be required to comply with the City's NPDES standards, requiring that potential pollutants not be allowed to enter surface waters. These City standards will assure that impacts to water quality and quantity will be less than significant. VIII. c) & d) The proposed project will be responsible for the drainage of on and off site flows, and has been designed to include retention areas within the project. The City Engineer requires that these retention areas retain the 100 year storm on site, which is expected to lower potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. e) -g) The construction of the proposed project will not have an impact on the City's storm drainage system. The site is not located within a FEMA designated 100 year storm area. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -20- IX. a) -c) The proposed project is surrounded by vacant or commercially developed land, and will continue this pattern of development. The land is designated in the General Plan for Regional Commercial, and will not include the development of residential property. The site is within the fee payment area of the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan, and will be required to pay the fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance. SACity Clerk\ResolutionsVes 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -21- Potentially Less Than Loss Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING' Would the project: a) Physically divide an established X community? (Aerial photo) b) Conflict with any applicable land use X plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan Land Use Element) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 74 ff.) IX. a) -c) The proposed project is surrounded by vacant or commercially developed land, and will continue this pattern of development. The land is designated in the General Plan for Regional Commercial, and will not include the development of residential property. The site is within the fee payment area of the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan, and will be required to pay the fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance. SACity Clerk\ResolutionsVes 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -21- X. a) & b) The proposed project site is within the MRZ-1 Zone, and is therefore not considered to have potential for mineral resources. SACity ClerMesolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-461 exh A part I.doc -22- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a X known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) b) Result in the loss of availability of a X locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) X. a) & b) The proposed project site is within the MRZ-1 Zone, and is therefore not considered to have potential for mineral resources. SACity ClerMesolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-461 exh A part I.doc -22- r -- Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Less Than No Significant w/ Significant Impact Mitigation Impact )Cl. NOISE B Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation X of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (MEA p. 111 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Project description) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Project description) d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan land use map) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -23- XI. a) -f) The proposed project will result in the development of commercial and retail land uses, which are not considered sensitive receptors. Although persons visiting the center will be subject to higher noise levels, due to the project's location adjacent to Highway 111, this exposure will be temporary and periodic, and will not result in any significant impacts. The proposed project will generate elevated noise levels during construction, but there are no sensitive receptors located adjacent to the project site (residential and school uses), and therefore, there is expected to be no impact to adjacent land uses as a result of project construction or operation. Commercial and retail land uses are not expected to generate ground borne vibrations. The project is not located in the vicinity of either an airport of airstrip. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-491 exh A part Woc -24- r XII. a) -c) The proposed project will result in the construction of commercial land uses which will generate a need for employees. However, the project is well within the development potential assessed in the General Plan EIR, and is likely to have jobs filled by new City residents and residents new to adjacent communities. No impacts are expected to population and housing. SACity Clerk\ResolutionAres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -25- Potentially mess Than Less T kan No Significant Significant w! Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impart XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth X in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) b) Displace substantial numbers of X existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of X people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) XII. a) -c) The proposed project will result in the construction of commercial land uses which will generate a need for employees. However, the project is well within the development potential assessed in the General Plan EIR, and is likely to have jobs filled by new City residents and residents new to adjacent communities. No impacts are expected to population and housing. SACity Clerk\ResolutionAres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -25- XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.) Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X X X X X XIII. a) Buildout of the site will have a less than significant impact on public services. The proposed project will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City contract. Buildout of the proposed project will generate property and sales tax which will offset the costs of added police and fire services. The project will be required to pay the mandated school fees in place at the time of issuance of building permits. There will be no impact to City parks due to the construction of commercial facilities. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -26- XIV. a) & b) The construction of retail commercial development will not impact the City's recreational resources. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -27- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of X existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application materials) b) Does the project include recreational X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application materials) XIV. a) & b) The construction of retail commercial development will not impact the City's recreational resources. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -27- XV. a) -g) Several traffic impact analyses have been conducted for portions of the project sites. These analyses included a number of mitigation measures, which will be applied to the "Traffic Impacts Associated with the Adams Street Hotel and Restaurants" and "Adams Street Hotel Access Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis," Endo Engineering, November 30, 1998 and January 8, 1999, respectively. Also "La Quinta Corporate Centre Traffic Impact Study," Endo Engineering, May 10, 1999. SACity ClerklResolutionslres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Wac -28- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is X substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan EIR, p. III -29 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or X cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, p. 111-29 ff.) c) Result in a change in air traffic X patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (No air traffic involved in project) d) Substantially increase hazards due to a X design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (Project description) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (Project description) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (Project description) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, X or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project description) XV. a) -g) Several traffic impact analyses have been conducted for portions of the project sites. These analyses included a number of mitigation measures, which will be applied to the "Traffic Impacts Associated with the Adams Street Hotel and Restaurants" and "Adams Street Hotel Access Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis," Endo Engineering, November 30, 1998 and January 8, 1999, respectively. Also "La Quinta Corporate Centre Traffic Impact Study," Endo Engineering, May 10, 1999. SACity ClerklResolutionslres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Wac -28- proposed project as applicable. In addition, the project site and the construction of regional commercial development were included in the City's General Plan EIR. The EIR found that traffic in this area of Highway 111 will operate at acceptable levels of service at General Plan buildout. The driveway proposed on Adams Street, midway between Corporate Drive and Highway 111, may pose a traffic hazard if full turn movements are permitted, primarily due to the short distance between it and the Highway 111 intersection, and the high number of trips from the adjacent commercial development to the west. The City Engineer, however, will condition the permitted turning movements from each driveway, including this one, as part of his review of the proposed project. With imposition of these conditions of approval, impacts to safety hazards are expected to be less than significant. The mitigation measures previously applied to the project site shall apply, as follows: 1. All internal drives and streets shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer during the Design Review process to ensure compliance with City standards. 2. Off-street parking shall be provided in conformance with the requirements of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 3. All internal street shall be fully constructed to their ultimate cross-sections as adjacent on-site development occurs. 4. Sidewalks and streetlights shall be installed on-site in conformance with the Municipal Code. 5. All internal street intersections shall provide clear, unobstructed sight distance. 6. All site driveways exiting the project site shall include a STOP sign and clear unobstructed sight distances. 7. The lane geometrics shown in Figures VI -2 and VI -3 of the traffic impact analysis shall be installed adjacent to the project site. Phasing of the intersection improvements shall be in conformance with the conditions of approval provided by the City Engineer. 8. The project proponent shall participate in the City's traffic mitigation fee program. 9. Turning movements permitted on Adams Street and the project driveway, midway between Corporate Way and Highway 111 shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits for the site. Should the City Engineer require additional study of the potential turning movement hazards at this location, the project proponent shall provide this analysis for review and approval. '— With the implementation .of these mitigation measures, impacts to the City's circulation system should be less than significant. SACity ClerMesolutionakes 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -29- SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -30- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS B Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment X requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) b) Require or result in the construction of X new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) c) Require or result in the construction of X new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) d) Have sufficient water supplies X available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) e) Result in a determination by the X wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project=s projected demand in addition to the provider=s existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient X permitted capacity to accommodate the project=s solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) g) Comply with federal, state, and local X statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -30- XVI. a) -g) Utilities are available at the project site. The land use intensity was included in the analysis of the General Plan, and levels of service were found to be acceptable. No r-- impacts to utilities are expected as a result of the proposed project. S:1City Clerk\ResolutionAres 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -31- XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? b) 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)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X X X X XVII. a) The project site is disturbed vacant desert, and is not habitat for sensitive species in the area. The proposed project will not, therefore, degrade existing habitat for fish and wildlife. The site has been identified as having potentially significant cultural resources. However, mitigation measures included above will assure that these potential resources are protected, and that potential impacts are reduced to less than significant levels. XVII.b) The proposed project supports the long term goals of the General Plan by adding to the economic base of the City. XVII. c) The project will not have considerable cumulative impacts, and will not exceed those impacts identified in the General Plan EIR for this area of the City, or the City as a whole. SACity ClerMesolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part I.doc -32- XVII. d) The proposed project has the potential to adversely affect human beings, due to air quality impacts. Since the Coachella Valley is in a non -attainment area for PM 10, and the site will generate a high level of criteria pollutants, which can cause negative health effects, Section III), above, includes a number of mitigation measures to reduce the potential impacts on air quality. The impacts are not expected to be any more than those identified in the General Plan EM, which included analysis of regional commercial development at the project site. SACity Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Woc -33- XVIII. 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 analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Environmental Assessments 98-373 and 99-383 were utilized in preparation of this Environmental Assessment. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Not applicable. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. Not applicable. S:1City Clerk\Resolutions\res 03-100 ea 03-481 exh A part Ldoc -34- RESOLUTION 2003-100 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 ADOPTED: OCTOBER 7, 2003 CITY OF LA QUINTA MONITORING PROGRAM FOR CEQA COMPLIANCE EXHIBIT "A" DATE: S !ember 2, 2003 ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.: 649-020-043,649-020-063,-064,-065 CASE NO.: Specific Plan 2003-066 PROJECT LOCATION: Northeast corner of Adams Street and Hi&way 111 EA/EIR NO: 2003-481 APPROVAL DATE: In Process APPLICANT: Thomas Enterprises 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 TII1IUNG CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CHECKED BY DATE I. AESTHETICS Amend plant palette to allow only Community Development Prior to approval of grading Resubmittal of permitted plant materials in Hwy 111 Department permits. Specific Plan landscape setback. Install Hwy 111 landscaping with first Building Department Project Construction Site inspection phase. Amend SP text and elevations to Community Development Prior to issuance of grading Resubmittal of reflect consistent detailed architecture Department permits. Specific Plan on north facing elevations. Sink or screen loading docks. Community Development Prior to issuance of grading Resubmittal of Department permits. Specific Plan SUMMARY A11MGATION MEASURES RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE CHECKED BY MATE M. AIR QUALITY Maintain construction equipment. Contractor Project Construction SCAQMD standards Utilize temporary power. City Engineer Prior to issuance of grading QD standards permits. Balance cut and fill on site. City Engineer Project Construction Municipal Code Pre -water and stabilize soils. Building Department Prior to issuance of building Site inspection permits. Inform personnel of ridesharing and Community Development Prior to the issuance of PM10 provide alternative transportation. Department grading permits Management Plan Install landscaping early. Install Building Department During construction. Site inspection. Adams and Hwy 111 parkways immediately following mass grading. Enforce SCAQMD Rule 403 Building Department During grading. Site inspection. Stop grading during winds of more Building Department During grading. Site inspection. than 25 mph., 1 st and 2nd stage ozone episodes. SCAQMD Provide notices to SCAQMD Building Department Prior to grading 2002 Coachella Valley PM 10 SIP. Enforce TDM Ordinance Community Development Prior to issuance of TDM Plan Department occupancy permits Coordinate bus stops with SunLine, Community Development Prior to issuance of grading Clearance letter and build bus stop as required. Department permits. from SunLine. Apply GP EIR mitigation measures Community Development Prior to issuance of grading Site inspection. wherever applicable. Department permits. SUMMARY MITIGATION MEASURES RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE . CHECKED BY DATE V. CULTURAL RESOURCES XV. TRAFFIC Submit final Phase III Data Recovery Community Development Prior to issuance of first Site inspection; City Engineer. report Department building permit Community Development Prior to issuance of grading Plan submittal conformance with Municipal Code. Community Development During all earth moving Standard Construct internal streets to ultimate. City Engineer Archaeological monitor to on site Department activities professional permit. during on or off site earth moving practices. Install sidewalks and street lights in Building Department activities. Plan submittal. conformance with Municipal Code. permit. SUNIlVLARY MITIGATION RESPONSIBLE FOR TINTING CRITERIA MEASURES MONITORING XV. TRAFFIC All internal drives to be approved by City Engineer Prior to issuance of grading Plan submittal. City Engineer. permit. Require off-street parking in Community Development Prior to issuance of grading Plan submittal conformance with Municipal Code. Department. permit. Construct internal streets to ultimate. City Engineer Prior to issuance of grading Plan submittal. width when adjacent development permit. occurs. Install sidewalks and street lights in Building Department Prior to issuance of building Plan submittal. conformance with Municipal Code. permit. Provide clear sight distance. City Engineer Prior to issuance of building Plan submittal. permit. All exits to include STOP sign. City Engineer Prior to issuance of building Plan submittal. permit. Construct Iane geometrics in City Engineer Prior to issuance of building Plan submittal. conformance with Figures VI -2 and permit. VI -3 of traffic study. COMPLIANCE I DATE CHECKED BY Pay Traffic Impact Fee. City Engineer Prior to issuance of building Payment of fee permit. Review turning movements allowed City Engineer Prior to issuance of building Plan and/or report on Adams at ro'ect drivewa . permit, submittal RESOLUTION NO. 2003=100 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 7" day of October, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider this request by THOMAS ENTERPRISES for Environmental Assessment 2003-481 for Specific Plan 2003-066 which allows construction of a 175,200 square foot shopping center at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street, more particularly described as: APN's: 649-020-043, -063, -064, and -065, WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment 2003-481 has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2003-481) and has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of this Assessment and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be certified; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on the 9th day of September, 2003, did consider this request, and recommended to the City Council, certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 2003-066; and, WHEREAS, on July 31, 2003, the Community Development Department mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment on the proposed project. All written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the Public Hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on September 16, 2003, for the City Council meeting as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public Hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and Resolution No. 2003-100 Environmental Assessment2003-481 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 2 WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did make the following findings to justify certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either directly, or indirectly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2003- 481. 2. The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number, or restrict the range of rare, or endangered plants, or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends in that mitigation measures are imposed on the project that will reduce impacts to less than significant levels. 4. The proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned, or proposed development in the immediate vicinity,_ as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project. 6. The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment in that mitigation measures are imposed on the project that will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Resolution No. 2003-100 Environmental Assessment2003-481 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 3 8. The City Council has considered Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and said Assessment reflects the independent judgment of the City. 9. The City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle. Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct, and constitute the findings of the City Council for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2003-481 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Mitigation Monitoring Plan on file in the Community Development Department and attached hereto (Exhibit "A"). 3. That Environmental Assessment 2003-481 reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 7t' day of October, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Henderson, Osborne, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Adolph NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Resolution No. 2003-100 Environmental Assessment2003-481 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 4 ATTEST: pr -b" IIE�- —IA-- � V, ) JU S. GREEK, CMC, CitTtlerk City of La Quinta, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KAP RINE JENS , CitAttorney City of La Quinta, California 011 1.. - , fz 01NOADO PH, yar City of La Quinta, California jhb M I* W* he the breong is a *14 fiN w d eallob cm 09ind � pages: ofth eie an tete I" "M ofte are the city Okwk at tt+e CIY J1 La ICaj j Ctrtlt __ RESOLUTION NO. 2003-101 A RESOLUTION OF THE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES FOR A 175,200 SQUARE FOOT SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND ADAMS STREET CASE: SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 7th day of October, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by THOMAS ENTERPRISES for approval of a Specific Plan to allow a 175,200 square foot shopping center on 17.4± acres at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street in the CR (Regional Commercial) zone district, more particularly described as: APN's: 649-020-043, -063, -064, and -065 WHEREAS, the La Quinta Community Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and based upon this Assessment, the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact is recommended. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office on August 26, 2003, as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on the 9th day of September, 2003, did consider this request, and recommend to the City Council approval of the Specific Plan by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 2003-067; and, WHEREAS, on July 31, 2003, the Community Development Department mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment on the proposed project. All written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the Public Hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on September 16, 2003, for the City Council meeting as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public Hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 2 WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did make the following Mandatory Findings to justify approval of said Specific Plan: Finding A - Consistency with General Plan The property is designated Mixed Regional Commercial (M/RC) for large scale commercial projects consisting of major department and specialty stores, supermarkets, and other retail and restaurant uses. The proposed project will provide these types of uses. Additionally, the project provides adequate perimeter landscaping and acceptable architectural design pursuant to Primary and Secondary Image Corridor Policies. Finding B — Public Welfare Enhancement The project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare in that the project is designed in compliance with the City's General Plan, Zoning and design standard requirements and other County and State standards, such as CEQA. Findings C and D — Land Use Compatibility and Property Suitability The project is in a commercially designated and zoned area which is proposed for and, therefore, suitable for commercial development. The project provides adequate buffering through landscaping and walls to .ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of said City Council in this case; and 2. That it does hereby acknowledge that Environmental Assessment 2003- 481 has determined that no significant effects on the environment have been identified and mitigation measures are being imposed; and 3. It does hereby approve Specific Plan 2003-066, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 3 4. That upon approval of Specific Plan 2003-066, Specific Plans 99-033 and 99-036 (for the easterly portion of this property) shall be void and of no effect on the subject property. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held this 7th day of October, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Henderson, Osborne, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Adolph NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 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 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2003-101 SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 - THOMAS ENTERPRISES CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — FINAL ADOPTED: OCTOBER 7, 2003 (,FNFRAL 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 Specific Plan, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. This Specific Plan, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code §§ 66410 through 66499.58 the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC"). The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.la-quinta.org. 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency • CalTrans The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 2 4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs five (5) acres or more of land, or that disturbs less than five (5) acres of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than five (5) acres of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off-site grading being done in relation to this project. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant to this project. F. The approved SWPPP and BMP's shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 3 Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map or other development application all public street right-of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 7. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Highway 1 1 1 (Major Arterial, 140' ROW) — No additional right of way dedication is required except for an additional right of way dedication at the primary entry to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. 2) Adams Street (Secondary Arterial, 88' ROW) — No additional right of way dedication is required. 3) Corporate Centre Drive (Collector, 64' ROW Option) — No additional right of way dedication is required. 8. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 4 9. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right-of-ways shown on the approved Tentative Map are necessary prior to approval of the Final Map dedicating such right-of-ways, the applicant shall grant the necessary right-of-ways within 60 days of a written request by the City. 10. The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public utility easement contiguous with, and along both sides of all private streets, if applicable. Such easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of IID. 11. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right- of-ways as follows: A. Highway 1 1 1 (State - Major Arterial) - 50 -foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Adams Street and Corporate Centre Drive (Secondary Arterial/Collector) - 10 -foot from the R/W-P/L. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 12. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, and common areas on the Final Map. 13. Direct vehicular access to Highway 111 from lots with frontage along Highway 111 is restricted, except for those access points identified on the Specific Plan, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final map. 14. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 5 15. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, of any existing right-of-way, or access easement, the recordation of the tract map is subject to the applicant providing an alternate right-of-way or access easement, to those properties, or notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 16. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Specific Plan and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 17. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a file that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept a raster -image file of such Final Map. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, ,professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 18. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 19. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 6 The street improvement plans shall include permanent traffic control and separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area. A. Site Development Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal B. Traffic Signal Plan 1" = 20' Horizontal Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200 -feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2001 California Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on-site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. 20. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 21. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 7 At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 22. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off- site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 23. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 24. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. 25. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. (TRADING 26. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 27. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval - Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 8 28. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit. 29. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 30. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 9 the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 31. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 32. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 33. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous interior lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots that do not share a common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 34. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 35. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. DRAINA(',F 36. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval - Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 10 37. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field or equivalent system approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain surges of up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 38. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on-site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 39. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 40. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 41. The applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge into. the Coachella Valley Strom Water Channel which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this specific plan excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the final development CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. UTILITIES 42. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval - Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 11 43. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 44. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 45. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 46. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. A. OFF-SITE STREETS 1) Highway 111 (Major Arterial - State; 140' R/W): No widening of the north side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Specific Plan is required for its ultimate width as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout and bus shelter, pursuant to City of La Quinta approved design (if required by Sunline Transit) ` Other required improvements in the right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7. 2003 Page 12 a) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. b) 8 -foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line that either touches the back of curb or approaches within five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet, and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. 2) Adams Street (Secondary Arterial — 88' R/W): No widening of the east side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Specific Plan is required for its ultimate width as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions. B. PARKING LOT AND CIRCULATION — The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150. Contingent on development concepts of the property to the east, the applicant shall provide an additional connection to the parking area from the shared entry drive off of Highway 111 at La Quinta Drive. The connection shall be located approximately 300 feet north of Highway 111 and aligned with the east/west circulation road south of Building Area 5. Drive thru access to the southerly east/west circulation road from Building Area 4 at the southeast corner of the property shall be at least 100 feet from the west curb face of the shared entry drive to the east. C. TRAFFIC SIGNAL - Traffic signal at the intersection of Adams Street and Corporate Centre Drive when warrants are met. Applicant is responsible for the cost to design and install the traffic signal. Applicant shall enter into an improvement agreement and post security for full cost to design and construct the traffic signal prior to issuance of an onsite grading Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 13 permit; the security shall remain in effect until the signal is constructed by the applicant. 47. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Highway 111 1) Primary Entry (Highway 111, 800 feet east of Adams Street): Right turn in, Right turn out. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 2) Secondary Entry (Highway 111, 420 feet east of Adams Street): Right turn in, Right turn our. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 3) Shared Entry (Highway 111, east of the easterly property line: Full turn movements are allowed at the existing signalized intersection of Highway 111 and La Quinta Drive. B. Adams Street - Limited to single access point as described below: 1) Primary Entry (Adams Street, 400 feet north of Highway 111): Full turn movements are allowed until traffic conditions at the entry warrant traffic installation at which time left turn restrictors shall be installed by the applicant. Prior to issuance of first permit for street improvements, the applicant shall post a bond or money, to pay for the reconfiguration of the intersection on Adams Street between Highway 111 and Adams Street should traffic conditions warrant traffic signal installation within the first five years after a certificate of occupancy has been issued to the first building, as determined by the Engineering Department. The bond shall cover the cost of constructing the traffic restrictors. At the end of the five years, if traffic conditions do not warrant traffic signal installation the bond/money shall be released to the applicant. C. Corporate Centre Drive - Limited to single access point as described below: 1) Primary Entry (Corporate Centre Drive, 300' east of Adams Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 14 Street): Full turn movements are allowed. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). 48. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20 -year life pavement, and the site-specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Parking Areas Collector Secondary Arterial Major Arterial 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. 4.0" a.c /5.0" c.a.b. 4.0" a.c./6.0" c.a.b. 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 49. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. A. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 50. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 15 CONSTRUCTION 51. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly - maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on-site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last building within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 52. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC. 53. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, and common lots. 54. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention and basins, shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 55. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer with all trees having a minimum 1.5" caliper. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval - Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 16 PUBLIC SERVICES 56. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements, including bus shelter per the City design standards, as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by Caltrans and the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 57. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 58. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 59. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 60. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. MAINTENANCE 61. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 62. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on-site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 17 FEES AND DEPOSITS 63. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 64. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). MISCELLANEOUS 65. A minimum three-foot high screening of the parking lot surfaces shall be provided adjacent to Adams Street and Corporate Center Drive by the use of screen shrubs, short walls and/or berming. 66. All mitigation measures contained in Environmental Assessment 2003-481 are required to be complied with, as noted. 67. All masonry walls where determined by the Community Development Department to be readily visible from public streets shall be decorative in material and color. 68. The exterior elevations of all buildings contained .in the specific plan text are conceptual only and subject to approval of a site. development permit by the Planning Commission. 69. A sign program for the shopping center shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to approval of a grading permit. 70. Comments received from the Police Department shall be considered and incorporated into the Site Development Permit project design where feasible. FIRE MARSHAL 71. Approved super fire hydrants shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 18 72. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 73. Fire Department connections shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than 50 feet from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the street side of the buildings. 74. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City plan check. 75. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 76. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department. 77. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 78. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of the 15t. floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. 79. Any commercial operation that produces grease. -laden vapors will require a Hood/duct system for fire protection. (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.) 80. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of 13"6" clear and unobstructed. 81. Install a KNOX key box on the building. (Contact the Fire Department for an application) 82. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code. Resolution No. 2003-101 Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Final Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 19 83. The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 4000 gpm and the actual fire flow from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 2000 gpm for a 4 -hour duration at 20 -psi residual operating pressure. The fire flow is based on all buildings having a full NFPA 13 sprinkler system. BUILDING DESIGN REVISION 84. The loading dock for Major "A" (Henri's) and delivery trucks when using it shall be screened from view of Corporate Center Drive. This screening shall be accomplished by a decorative masonry screen wall and/or lowering of the loading dock. P.O. Box 1504 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO LA Q,UINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 October 24, 2003 County Clerk County of Riverside 2724 Gateway Drive Riverside, CA 92501-3801 � FIS; COPY Gi (760) 777-7000 FAX (760) 777-7101 Subject: Notice of Determination for Specific Plan 2003-066 and EA 2003-481 To whom it may concern: Enclosed is a Notice of Determination and Check #3327 for $ 1314 for required fees for a Negative Declaration approved by the City of La Quinta for Environmental Assessment 2003-481 for Specific Plan 2003-066. Enclosed are two self-addressed stamped envelopes for returning correspondence to us. Very Truly Yours, Jerry Herman Community Development Director Stan Sawa Principal Planner Encl. P:\stan\sp 03-066 thomas\ltr nod.doc NOTICE OF DETERMINATION To: _ Office of Planning and Research From: CITY OF LA QUINTA 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 P. 0. Box 1504 Sacramento CA 95814 La Quinta CA 92253 X County Clerk County of Riverside 2724 Gateway Drive Riverside CA 92501-3801 Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Project Title: Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and Specific Plan 2003-066, Thomas Enterprises State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to Clearin house} Lead Agency Contact Person Area Code/Telephone/Extension N.A. Stan Sawa 760-777-7125 Project Location (include County): Northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street, in the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside Project Description: 175,200 shopping center on 17.4 acres in CR zone district. This is to advise that the City of La Quinta has approved the above described project on October 7,2003, as (X Lead Agency Responsible Agency), and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: 1 . The project [_will X will not] have a significant effect on the environment. 2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures [ X were _ were not] made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [ was X was not] adopted for this project. 5. Findings [X were _ were not) made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Environmental Documents (EA 2003-481), with any comments, responses and record of project approval, are available to the General Public at: City of La Quinta, Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico, P.O. Box 1504, La Quinta, CA 92253 Name/Signature (Public Agency) Date received for filing at OPR: Date Title FOURTH QUARTER PROPERTIES XII LLC 3327 770-801-0990 300 VILLAGE GREEN CIRCLE STE 200 SMYRNA, GA 30080 sa-2ia DATE October 22, 2003 7°"" PAY TO THE County of Riverside 1,314.00 ORDER OF . One Thousand Three Hundred Fourteen and No/ 100 DOLLARS Souffrust B nklgAdmrft GA FOR Ca Fish & Game Fee/LaQuinta, CA 1/ ollmay 11000332711' 406 1000 2 561: 60 836 7 l" It P.O. Box 1504 78-495 CALLE TAMPICO LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 October 17, 2003 Mr. Mike Peroni The Keith Companies 73-733 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 100 Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760) 777-7000 FAX (760) 777-7101 SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL ACTION FOR SP 2003-066 AND EA 03-481 (THE PAVILION AT LA QUINTA) Dear Mr. Peroni: The City Council at its meeting of October 7, 2003, adopted Resolutions 2003- 101 and 2003-100, approving your Specific Plan and Environmental Assessment request, subject to Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures. Copies are enclosed for your use. We are still waiting for the $1314 fee so that we can submit the fee and Notice of Determination to the County of Riverside. Please make all corrections and amendments to the specific plan document as a result of the approval. I have included a copy of the City Council approved Specific Plan document with the corrections we noticed red -lined (Mike Peroni only). Include all conditions of approval and mitigation measures in the document at the back Please submit five copies of the final specific plan for our use prior to issuance of any permits. If you have any questions, please contact me at (760) 777-7064. Very Truly Yours, JERRY HERMAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR STAN SAWA PRINCIPAL PLANNER Encl. C: Mel Kuhnel, Thomas Enterprises Public Works IIDPD-DDC City of La Quetta Stan Sawa, Principal Planner PO Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 August 26, 2003 0.6 11: Subject: EA 2003-481 & SP 2003-066, Thomas Enterprise c/o The Keith Companies Dear Mr. Sawa: Review of the plans for the above mentioned project determined it would impact electric service to the area. The cumulative impact of projects of this size increase the electrical demand on the IID's existing facilities at peak loading periods, and results in the need for additional generation, transmission, substation, and distribution facilities. When additional facilities are needed, projects of this magnitude directly impact power rates in the RD's service area and may results in higher electric rates in future years. Although the Imperial Irrigation District has received these preliminary plans for impact assessment, we will not begin to engineer nor derive cost estimates for this project until the owner/developer/contractor applies for electrical service. This procedure helps eliminate wasted manpower spent on projects that never reach construction stage. If you have any questions regarding this matter, or if I can be of further assistance, please contact me at (760) 398-5825. Sincerely, Enrique De Leon Distribution Supervisor EDL/ms RR I tR it COACHELLA VALLEY POWER DIVISION 81-600 AVENUE 58 - P. O. BOX 1080 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253-1080 TELEPHONE (760) 398-5854 - FAX (760) 391-5999 IIDPD-DDC City of La Quetta Stan Sawa, Principal Planner PO Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 August 26, 2003 0.6 11: Subject: EA 2003-481 & SP 2003-066, Thomas Enterprise c/o The Keith Companies Dear Mr. Sawa: Review of the plans for the above mentioned project determined it would impact electric service to the area. The cumulative impact of projects of this size increase the electrical demand on the IID's existing facilities at peak loading periods, and results in the need for additional generation, transmission, substation, and distribution facilities. When additional facilities are needed, projects of this magnitude directly impact power rates in the RD's service area and may results in higher electric rates in future years. Although the Imperial Irrigation District has received these preliminary plans for impact assessment, we will not begin to engineer nor derive cost estimates for this project until the owner/developer/contractor applies for electrical service. This procedure helps eliminate wasted manpower spent on projects that never reach construction stage. If you have any questions regarding this matter, or if I can be of further assistance, please contact me at (760) 398-5825. Sincerely, Enrique De Leon Distribution Supervisor EDL/ms August 18, 2003 CITY OF LA QUINTA 41 LA QUINTA POLICE 82-695 DR CARREON BLVD., INDIO CA. (760)863-8990 Stan Sawa, n RECE71V�p City of La Quinta Community Development Department Jif; i g P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 RE: The Pavilion At La Quinta Dear Mr. Sawa, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above described project. The following issues of concern related to public safety and law enforcement are presented. ADDRESSING: Address numbers should be illuminated during the hours of darkness and positioned to be readily readable from the street. Position the address numbers at a strategic and elevated section on the building to facilitate unhampered views from vehicular and pedestrian vantage -points. Numbers that are a minimum height of 12" are recommended. SECURITY SYSTEMS: Silent or audible alarm systems should be installed. Comprehensive security alarm systems should be provided for the following: perimeter building and access route protection, high valued storage areas, and, interior building door to shipping and receiving area. Closed Circuit High Definition TV security cameras are recommended to cover lobby entrances, building perimeter, shipping and receiving areas, parking lot, and exterior entrances. DOORS: Adequate security hardware, such as dead bolt locks, should be installed. All glass doors should be secured with a dead bolt. Dead bolt locks shall be the type whose dead bolt and deadlocking latch can be retracted by a single action of the inside door knob/lever/turn piece. WINDOWS: Louvered windows should not be used. Large windows and any window accessible from the side and rear but not visible from the street shall consist of rated burglary -resistant glazing or its equivalent. The type that attaches to the window frame is recommended. ATTICS, ROOF TOPS, AND OPENINGS: Two solid side walls are needed in the attic area for each business. This will make it harder for burglars to access multiple businesses via the attic. If the building has skylights, one of the following shall be utilized for every skylight: -Rated burglary resistant glass or acrylic material, -Iron bars of at least one half-inch diameter, flat steel bars of at least one quarter - inch width, spaced no more than five inches apart under the skylight and securely fastened, or -Grill of at least one eighth -inch steel and two-inch mesh. All hatchway openings on the roof of any building shall be secured as follows. If the hatchway is wooden, it shall be covered on the outside with at least 16 gauge sheet steel or its equivalent, attached in a manner making removal difficult. The hatchway shall be secured from the inside with a slide bar or slide bolts. Only a crossbar or padlock provided by the fire marshal shall be used. Outside pin -type hinges on all hatchway openings shall have non -removable pins. Exterior rooftop ladders should be eliminated or incorporated into the interior design. All air duct or air vent openings exceeding 8" by 12" on the rooftop or exterior walls of any building shall be secured by means of: -Iron bars or at least one half-inch diameter, or flat steel -bars of at least one quarter -inch width, spaced no more than five inches and securely fastened, -Grill of at least one eighth -inch steel and two-inch mesh, and/or -If the barrier is on the outside, it shall be secured with galvanized rounded -head, flush bolts of at least 3/8" diameter. LIGHTING: Interior night -lights shall be used during hours of darkness when premises are closed for business. Parking lots and associated car ports, driveways, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with lighting of sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to make clearly r 0 visible the presence of any person on or about the premises from at least 25 feet away during the hours of darkness. All exterior doors shall have their own light source which will adequately illuminate entry/exit areas at all hours in order to: -Make any person on the premises clearly visible, and -Provide adequate illumination for persons entering and exiting the building. LANDSCAPING: Landscaping shall be of the type and situated in locations to maximize observation while providing the desire degree of aesthetics. Security planting materials are encouraged along fence and property lines and under vulnerable windows. Landscaping shall not conceal doors or windows from view, obstruct visibility of the parking lot from the street or business buildings, nor provide access to the roof or windows. LINE OF SIGHT/NATURAL SURVEILLANCE: Wide -angled peep holes should be designed into solid doors which are located in areas where natural surveillance is compromised, and which will be utilized by employees to access parking lots and pedestrian paths during hours of darkness. Single and double binned trash enclosures should be located at the perimeter of the parking lot, not adjacent to buildings or contiguous to exterior building doors. Other line of sight obstructions (including recessed doorways, alcoves, etc.) should be avoided on building exterior walls, and interior hallways. Loading docks are an area where the potential for theft is magnified. In addition to strategically placed CCTV cameras, the docks should be of open design utilizing either low curbs or open railings. SIGNAGE/PARKING LOT: No trespassing signs shall be posted at the entrances of parking lots and other appropriate places. All entrances to parking areas shall be posted with appropriate no signs per 22658(a) C.V.C., to assist in removal of vehicles at the property owners/managers request. Signs must be at least 2'x1' in overall size with white background and black 2" lettering. FENCING/BARRIERS: Whenever possible, open fencing design such as wrought iron or tubular steel should be utilized in order to maximize natural surveillance while establishing territorality. Other barrier considerations include: block walls, decorative cement planters, access control to high valued storage areas, locked cages, rooms, and safes, shipping and receiving door screens, bullet resistant enclosures with pass through for pick up and delivery, and interior man -trap enclosures to secure and separate shipping and receiving areas. PRE -CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION PHASES: Thefts and burglaries of building materials, fixtures, and appliances from construction storage areas and buildings under construction are on the rise. To reduce thefts and burglaries during the construction phase of the project, the developer and builders need to provide site security. The La Quinta Police Department recommends the developer and builders use bonded security guards licensed by the State of California Bureau of Security & Investigative Services Department to handle project security. Prior to project completion, the surface of walls, fences, buildings, logo monuments, etc. should be graffiti resistant either through surface composition, applied paint type and/or planned shielding by landscaping or plants. Prior to construction on any structure, a material storage area should be established and enclosed by a six foot chain link fence to minimize theft of materials and/or equipment. A list of serial and/or license numbers of equipment stored at the location be maintained both, at the site and any off-site main office. The public and non- essential employees should be restricted in access to the construction areas. Current emergency contact information for the project should be kept on file with the La Quinta Police Department located at 82695 Dr. Carreon Blvd., Indio, CA 92201, phone number 760-863-8990. The developer and/or builder's name address, and phone number should be conspicuously posted at the construction site. Visibility into the construction site should not be intentionally hampered. Areas actually under construction should be lit during hours of darkness. All entrances and exits should be clearly marked. The construction site should have a clearly designated point of contact, such as a construction trailer or office. Post the emergency and non -emergency phone numbers for the fire and sheriff's departments and ambulance (AMR) service near any local site phone. The address for the complex should be posted near the local site phone. Any phones at the site that are blocked for outgoing calls should not be blocked from dialing 911. Should the planning department, developer or construction staff have any questions regarding the listed law enforcement and public safety concerns, please contact Senior Deputy Andy Gerrard at 760-863-8950. John lrton, Ca Chi of Police C 0 � AT L A ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY arSTE�`G� COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (760) 398-2651 • FAX (760) 398-3711 DIRECTORS: OFFICERS: JOHN W. MCFADDEN, PRESIDENT STEVEN B. ROBBINS, PETER NELSON, VICE PRESIDENT GENERAL MANAGER -CHIEF ENGINEER TELLIS CODEKAS August 15 2003 JULIA SECRETARY RUSSELL KITAHARA RUSSELL ADEZ, PARKS, 1� � DAN PARKS, ASST. TO GENERAL MANAGER PATRICA. LARSON REDWINE AND SHERRILL, ATTORNEYS File: 0163.1 0421.1 0721.1 050729-2 QCLU INT� RECEIVED C3 _22 Planning Commission City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 Gentlemen: Subject: Environmental Assessment No. 2003-481, SP No. 2003-066 This area is protected from regional stormwater flows by the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and may be considered safe from regional stormwater flows except in rare instances. This area is designated Zone X on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The District will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this District. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the District for sanitation service. The District requires restaurants to install a grease interceptor, including a sample box, sanitary tee and running trap with cleanout, prior to any discharge to its sanitation facilities. The size of the grease interceptor will be determined by the Riverside County Environmental Health Department and approved by the District. Installation of the interceptor will be inspected by the District. TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY I_ Z 41 Planning Commission City of La Quinta -2- August 15, 2003 The District requires detail, repair and lube auto shops and car washes to install an oil and sand separator, including a sample box, sanitary tee and running trap with cleanout, prior to any discharge to its sanitation facilities. The size of the oil and sand separator will be determined by the Riverside County Environmental Health Department and approved by the District. Installation of the oil and sand separator will be inspected by the District. The District requires laundromats and commercial establishments with laundry facilities to install a lint trap. The size of the lint trap will be determined by the Riverside County Environmental Health Department and approved by the District. Installation of the lint trap will be inspected by the District. Plans for grading, landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted to the District for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. If you have any questions please contact Dan Charlton, Stormwater Engineer, extension 2316. Yours very truly, Dan Farris Director of Engineering cc: Jeff Johnson Riverside County Department of Public Health 82-675 Highway 111, CAC Building, Second Floor, Room 209 Indio, California 92201 DC:md\eng\sw\aug\ea-2003-48 ] COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT oFd COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 7, 2003 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to Adopt Resolutions for a Request to: 1) Certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2003-481; 2) Grant Approval of Development Principals and Guidelines for a 175,200 Square Foot Commercial Complex on 17.48 Acres for Specific Plan 2003-066; and 3) Approve an Amendment to Specific Plan 98-033 Eliminating Seven Gross Acres and Adding Them to Specific Plan 2003-066 Applicant: Thomas Enterprises RECOMMENDATION: FILE COPT AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2003-481; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Specific Plan 2003-066 and amending Specific Plan 98-033, subject to the attached findings and Conditions of ApprovaJ. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Environmental Review: Environmental Assessment 2003-481 was prepared for this Specific Plan in P:\stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sp 03-066 cc rpt.doc of the floor space (154,800 square feet) will be in the "super -building" (building area 5), which will be a multi -tenant building consisting of five major -size users and two tenant shop areas. The Specific Plan states all grading and parking lot improvements will be done in one phase with all buildings constructed in one phase. Three of the four pads are shown with drive-through lanes. Proposed access to Highway 1 1 1 is shown at three locations, including a signalized driveway that is on the adjacent vacant land to the east which will be shared with that property when it develops. The driveway aligns with La Quinta Drive on the south side of Highway 1 1 1 and provides access to the auto dealers and the under -construction Center at La Quinta. The two other Highway 1 1 1 accesses are to the west of the signalized driveway and will be right turn in and out only. One driveway is provided on Adams Street, across from the Jiffy Lube entry. Two access driveways are provided on Corporate Center Drive on the north side of the project. An emergency access will be installed at the southwest corner of the World Gym site along the north property line. The required parking has been calculated based on 170,000 square feet of retail uses (5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor space) and 5,000 square feet as drive-through and fast food restaurant (10 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor space). This requires a total of 901 spaces. The remaining 200 square feet is not addressed in the calculation, but would require no more than two additional spaces, regardless of the use. The plan provides 913 to 915 spaces, which exceeds the required 901 spaces. The majority of the parking spaces are provided between building area five and Highway 111. The major landscaping feature will be the 50 -foot deep perimeter setback area along Highway 111. It will be designed to comply with the City's Highway 111 Design Guidelines. Screening of the parking lot surface along Highway 1 1 1 is shown by using a three foot high retaining wall at the interface between the parking lot surface and perimeter landscaping, with the perimeter bermed up to the top of the retaining wall. A 20 -foot deep landscaped setback is provided on Adams Street with a 10 -foot deep landscaped setback on Corporate Center Drive. Drive-through lanes will be screened by three-foot high mounds and screen plants. A masonry wall is proposed along the northern boundary of the property. Decorative paving surfaces are proposed for both vehicular and pedestrian areas. The conceptual design of the buildings is described in the Specific Plan as "traditional Mediterranean Tuscany village" and inspired themes found in La Quinta. Although a Site Development Permit application has not yet been submitted, the Specific Plan document includes most of the exterior building elevations. Exterior materials on front and exterior sides include smooth exterior plaster, stone veneer on tower faces and columns. Architectural accents include ceramic tile, wrought iron grilles, and decorative lighting. Vine covered wood trellis with stone columns and a public area 3003 Drive to one driveway 300 -feet from Adams Street, and Condition No. 65, regarding future access to Adams Street (Attachment 4). Initially, the west end of building area five was the short leg of an "L" shape. The revision separates the "short leg," consisting of a 14,500 square foot shop area, from building area five and moves it to an area adjacent to the Adams Street and Corporate Center Drive corner, with the long side facing Adams Street. With this site plan revision, the displaced parking spaces are moved to where the original building was located. The westerly driveway on Corporate Center Drive has been eliminated with customer and delivery trucks sharing the easterly driveway. According to the applicants' plans, the building square footage and number of parking spaces remains the same. The relocated building will be set back twenty feet (for landscaping) from the Adams Street right-of-way. The Public Works Department has reviewed this revision and finds it acceptable and recommends revisions to Conditions of Approval No. 47.13.1. and No. 65 of the Specific Plan as shown on the attached conditions. Condition No. 65 has been moved and is a part of Condition No. 47.13.1. The Community Development Department finds the revisions acceptable with the addition of Condition No. 85 which requires that for Major "A" (Henri's) the loading dock and delivery trucks, using the dock, not be visible to Corporate Center Drive. This will require a masonry screen wall and possibly lowering of the loading dock. FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The alternatives available to the City Council include: 1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2003-481; and Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving Specific Plan 2003-066 and amending Specific Plan 98-033, subject to the attached findings and Conditions of Approval; or 2. Do not adopt Resolutions of the City Council which would certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and approve Specific Plan 2003-066 (including amendment to Specific Plan 98-033); or 3. Provide staff with alternative direction. 5 0015 RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-481 APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 7th day of October, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider this request by THOMAS ENTERPRISES for Environmental Assessment 2003-481 for Specific Plan 2003-066 which allows construction of a 175,200 square foot shopping center at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street, more particularly described as: APN's: 649-020-043, -063, -064, and -065, WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment 2003-481 has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2003-481) and has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of this Assessment and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be certified; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on . the 9th day of September, 2003, did consider this request, and recommended to the City Council, certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 2003-066; and, WHEREAS, on July 31, 2003, the Community Development Department mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment on the proposed project. All written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the Public Hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on September 16, 2003, for the City Council meeting as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public Hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and 0017 PAstan\sp03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 cc res.doc City Council Resolution 2003 - Environmental Assessment 2003-481 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7, 2003 8. The City Council has considered Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and said Assessment reflects the independent judgment of the City. 9. The City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct, and constitute the findings of the City Council for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2003-481 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Mitigation Monitoring Plan on file in the Community Development Department and attached hereto (Exhibit "A"). 3. That Environmental Assessment 2003-481 reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 7th day of October, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta, California S:\CityMgr\STAFF REPORTS ONLY\PH2 EA Reso.doc 3 CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2003 - Environmental Checklist Form Environmental Assessment 2003-481 1. Project title: Specific Plan 03-066 2. Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact person and phone number: Stan Sawa 760-777-7125 4. Project location: Northeast corner of Adams Street and Highway 111 APN: 649-020-043, 649-020-063, -064, -065 EXHIBIT "A" 5. Project sponsor's name and address: Thomas Enterprises 73-333 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 100 Palm Desert, CA 92260 6. General plan designation: Regional Commercial 7. Zoning: Regional Commercial 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Specific Plan to establish the design standards and guidelines for a commercial center to include up to 175,200 square feet of retail and restaurant space, located within one central building and 4 smaller building pads. The smaller building pads are to be adjacent to Highway 111, and range from 3,500 to 9,000 square feet. The primary structure, to be located along the northern boundary of the site, totals 154,800 square.feet, and is envisioned to contain both anchor stores and in-line shops. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Vacant, World Gym and Future post office, Coachella Valley Channel South: Highway 111, Auto Center West: Regional Commercial, including gas station and Wal-Mart East: Vacant, Regional Commercial 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Coachella Valley Water District CalTrans P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -1- EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. 'Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more 'Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from 'Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, 'Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. C) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -3- 013 2. The landscaping along the entire frontage of Highway 111 shall be installed with the first phase of project development. I. c) The proposed project includes a very large main building or buildings (attached) totaling over 154,000 square feet, and potentially as long as 720 feet. The Specific Plan depicts the north elevations for this building with no articulation or architectural detail, and with a number of loading docks (see Figure #7), which will have a potentially significant aesthetic impact on both commercial buildings and residential land uses to the north. Of particular concern is both the lack of aesthetic applied to this side of the project, and the need to assure that in the long term, this side of the project will not become visually blighted. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: 1. The Specific Plan shall be amended as follows: a. Architectural elevations shown in Figures 16 to 21 shall be amended to reflect improvements to the north side elevations consistent with the architectural style of the facades of the building(s). b. The text of the Specific Plan, under Section "Architectural Guidelines" shall be amended to include a discussion of the importance of architectural details on all building elevations, and particularly on the "back of house" elevations on the north side of the site. C. The Specific Plan shall be amended to include, under Section "Architectural Guidelines," a requirement for screened and/or sunken loading docks, to assure that the visual impacts of these facilities is minimized. The implementation of these mitigation measures will assure that aesthetic impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. I. d) The project will generate light from parking lot and security lighting. The project will be required, however, through the Site Development Permit process, to demonstrate that the lighting on the site will remain contained to the site, in conformance with the City's lighting ordinance. In addition, this ordinance requires that all lighting be directed downwards, and be shielded, to assure that the security lighting on the north side of the site does not impact the adjacent land uses. The implementation of these standards will assure that the impacts associated with light and glare will be less than significant. 015 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -5- III. a), b) & c) The City's primary source of pollution is the automobile. The proposed project includes the development of up to 175,200 square feet of commercial retail space which will generate approximately 12,895 daily trips at the site'. Based on this traffic generation, and an average trip length of 15 miles, the following emissions can be expected to be generated from the project site. 1 Based on Table IV -1, of "La Quinta Corporate Centre Traffic Impact Study," prepared by Endo Engineering, May 1999, and assuming 158.4 thousand s.f. commercial retail and 9.0 thousand s.f. restaurant, categories 820 and 832. P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -7- 017 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any air quality standard or X contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, 2002 PM 10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) III. a), b) & c) The City's primary source of pollution is the automobile. The proposed project includes the development of up to 175,200 square feet of commercial retail space which will generate approximately 12,895 daily trips at the site'. Based on this traffic generation, and an average trip length of 15 miles, the following emissions can be expected to be generated from the project site. 1 Based on Table IV -1, of "La Quinta Corporate Centre Traffic Impact Study," prepared by Endo Engineering, May 1999, and assuming 158.4 thousand s.f. commercial retail and 9.0 thousand s.f. restaurant, categories 820 and 832. P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -7- 017 The proposed project will generate dust during construction. Under mass grading conditions, this could result in the generation of 461.5 pounds per day, for a limited period while grading operations are active. The contractor will be required to submit a PM10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM10 can be mitigated by the measures below. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on-site power generation. 3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site. 5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on- going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 7. Any area which remains undeveloped for a period of more than 30 days shall be stabilized using either chemical stabilizers or a desert wildflower mix hydroseeded on the affected portion of the site. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. Parkway landscaping on both Adams Street and Highway 111 shall be installed immediately following mass grading of the site. 9. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction - related dirt on approach routes to the site. 10. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour 11. The project proponent shall notify the City and SCAQMD of the start and end of grading activities in conformance and within the time frames established in the 2002 PM10 Management Plan. 12. Any business on the proposed project site which employs 100 or more persons shall be required to implement the standards and conditions of the City's Transportation Demand Management Ordinance. 019 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -9- P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc or, Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, X either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on X any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) d) Interfere substantially with the X movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 73 ff.) f) Conflict with the provisions of an X adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc or, V. a), b) & d) Cultural resource surveys have previously been completed for the proposed project site'. The surveys and site investigations identified significant resources on portions of the project site. Site CA-RIV-6190 was found not to constitute a significant resource, and no further action is required on this site. A portion of Site CA-RIV-2936, however, was found to be significant. Two potential mitigation measures were offered for the historic site: to either fully excavate the site, or to cover the site and protect it from further disturbance. The City determined that, in conformance with CEQA, Section 15126.4(b)(3), preservation in place is the preferred mitigation measure (also see Staff Report and Minutes, Historic Preservation Commission, August 19, 1999). However, the Historic Preservation Commission determined that excavation of the site should occur as recommended by the archaeological testing and evaluation report prepared by CRM TECH. An interim Phase III data recovery report was completed in December, 1999, and accepted by the HPC in January, 2000, subject to submission of a final report. The site is also to be monitored during earth moving activities to ensure that any additional resources 3 "Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel 111 Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999. P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -13- .� Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the ro'ect: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? ("Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel 111 Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999.) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? ("Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel 111 Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999.) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ("General Plan Exhibit 6.8) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? "Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel 111 Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999.) V. a), b) & d) Cultural resource surveys have previously been completed for the proposed project site'. The surveys and site investigations identified significant resources on portions of the project site. Site CA-RIV-6190 was found not to constitute a significant resource, and no further action is required on this site. A portion of Site CA-RIV-2936, however, was found to be significant. Two potential mitigation measures were offered for the historic site: to either fully excavate the site, or to cover the site and protect it from further disturbance. The City determined that, in conformance with CEQA, Section 15126.4(b)(3), preservation in place is the preferred mitigation measure (also see Staff Report and Minutes, Historic Preservation Commission, August 19, 1999). However, the Historic Preservation Commission determined that excavation of the site should occur as recommended by the archaeological testing and evaluation report prepared by CRM TECH. An interim Phase III data recovery report was completed in December, 1999, and accepted by the HPC in January, 2000, subject to submission of a final report. The site is also to be monitored during earth moving activities to ensure that any additional resources 3 "Interim Cultural Resources Report, Hotel 111 Project Site," CRM Tech, December, 1998 and "Archaeological Testing and Site Evaluation at La Quinta Corporate Centre," CRM Tech, August 2, 1999. P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -13- .� P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -17- 4. Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: a) Create a significant hazard to the X X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application materials) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application materials) d) Be located on a site which is included X on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or X physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ff) P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -17- 4. 029 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -19- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would theproject: a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? (General Plan E1R p. III -187 ff.) b) Substantially deplete groundwater X supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? (General Plan EIR p. II1-187 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) d) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) e) Create or contribute runoff water X which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (Project Grading, Site Hydrology) f) Place housing within a 100 -year flood X hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood 029 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -19- IX. a) -c) The proposed project is surrounded by vacant or commercially developed land, and will continue this pattern of development. The land is designated in the General Plan for Regional Commercial, and will not include the development of residential property. The site is within the fee payment area of the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan, and will be required to pay the fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 031 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -21- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established X community? (Aerial photo) b) Conflict with any applicable land use X plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan Land Use Element) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 74 ff.) IX. a) -c) The proposed project is surrounded by vacant or commercially developed land, and will continue this pattern of development. The land is designated in the General Plan for Regional Commercial, and will not include the development of residential property. The site is within the fee payment area of the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan, and will be required to pay the fee in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 031 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -21- XI. a) -f) The proposed project will result in the development of commercial and retail land uses, which are not considered sensitive receptors. Although persons visiting the center will be subject to higher noise levels, due to the project's location adjacent to Highway 111, this exposure will be temporary and periodic, and will not result in any significant impacts. The proposed project will generate elevated noise levels during construction, but there ate no sensitive receptors located adjacent to the project site (residential and school uses), and therefore, there is expected to be no impact to adjacent land uses as a result of project P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -23- 03.3 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XI. NOISE B Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation X of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (MEA p. 111 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Project description) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Project description) d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan land use map) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) XI. a) -f) The proposed project will result in the development of commercial and retail land uses, which are not considered sensitive receptors. Although persons visiting the center will be subject to higher noise levels, due to the project's location adjacent to Highway 111, this exposure will be temporary and periodic, and will not result in any significant impacts. The proposed project will generate elevated noise levels during construction, but there ate no sensitive receptors located adjacent to the project site (residential and school uses), and therefore, there is expected to be no impact to adjacent land uses as a result of project P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -23- 03.3 Y.H. a) -c) The proposed project will result in the construction of commercial land uses which will generate a need for employees. However, the project is well within the development potential assessed in the General Plan EIR, and is likely to have jobs filled by new City residents and residents new to adjacent communities. No impacts are expected to population and housing. 035 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -25- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth X in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) b) Displace substantial numbers of X existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of X people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) Y.H. a) -c) The proposed project will result in the construction of commercial land uses which will generate a need for employees. However, the project is well within the development potential assessed in the General Plan EIR, and is likely to have jobs filled by new City residents and residents new to adjacent communities. No impacts are expected to population and housing. 035 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -25- XIV. a) & b) The construction of retail commercial development will not impact the City's recreational resources. 037 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -27- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of X existing neighborhood and regional -parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application materials) b) Does the project include recreational X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application materials) XIV. a) & b) The construction of retail commercial development will not impact the City's recreational resources. 037 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -27- proposed project as applicable. In addition, the project site and the construction of regional commercial development were included in the City's General Plan EIR. The EIR found that traffic in this area of Highway 111 will operate at acceptable levels of service at General Plan buildout. The driveway proposed on Adams Street, midway between Corporate Drive and Highway 111, may pose a traffic hazard if full turn movements are permitted, primarily due to the short distance between it and the Highway 111 intersection, and the high number of trips from the adjacent commercial development to the west. The City Engineer, however, will condition the permitted turning movements from each driveway, including this one, as part of his review of the proposed project. With imposition of these conditions of approval, impacts to safety hazards are expected to be less than significant. The mitigation measures previously applied to the project site shall apply, as follows: All internal drives and streets shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer during the Design Review process to ensure compliance with City standards. 2. Off-street parking shall be provided in conformance with the requirements of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 3. All internal street shall be fully constructed to their ultimate cross-sections as adjacent on-site development occurs. 4. Sidewalks and streetlights shall be installed on-site in conformance with the Municipal Code. All internal street intersections shall provide clear, unobstructed sight distance. 6. All site driveways exiting the project site shall include a STOP sign and clear unobstructed sight distances. 7. The lane geometrics shown in Figures VI -2 and VI -3 of the traffic impact analysis shall be installed adjacent to the project site. Phasing of the intersection improvements shall be in conformance with the conditions of approval provided by the City Engineer. 8. The project proponent shall participate in the City's traffic mitigation fee program. 9. Turning movements permitted on Adams Street and the project driveway, midway between Corporate Way and Highway 111 shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits for the site. Should the City Engineer require additional study of the potential turning movement hazards at this location, the project proponent shall provide this analysis for review and approval. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts to the City's circulation system should be less than significant. 039 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -29- impacts to utilities are expected as a result of the proposed project. 041. P:\SiAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checkiist.doc -31- XVII. d) The proposed project has the potential to adversely affect human beings, due to air quality impacts. Since the Coachella Valley is in a non -attainment area for PM10, and the site will generate a high level of criteria pollutants, which can cause negative health effects, Section III), above, includes a number of mitigation measures to reduce the potential impacts on air quality. The impacts are not expected to be any more than those identified in the General Plan EIR, which included analysis of regional commercial development at the project site. 043 P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\ea 03-481 checklist.doc -33- H 00 W M O O N z O J W J V z V r 00 et M O O N H z W N N W Cl) Cl) J z W 20 z W ir a 0 W Q W F d D z d � av UV 0 4- W F a, _ G7 w O ° 0 0 z > u y F a 0 o ° ° x O c c 0 0-4 EA G o P t VA � UA VA ox bb S o >�o x tD o cd cz O, 'on (U w a� N 3 o C o cn n4 W F F Q A 4 W y, D lz 0 ax O� UU as � o .Q N cz i0+ cl �' bD U" 4: O > E c E' co UU in, M 00 0 O� z o 0 as > > C) � Q A Q O W a 0.' E Eo. E E a UQUA a� a z � w o 0 a 0� �> U 04 c o 0 0 Hcon Wo cncl A bA G4 w ►.a a E � o U 4. O 4+ O 4. O c� bD O O N N o o O O O O cz � W F 4 D lz as UU 0.' a" a a a a a cz H co bA b4 bA 7 U 4. O 4+ O 4. O N N N O O O O F � � a O 4) 0 � 0 � O y 0 O O� 0 � Oa i.0..a f. a a. Qo p0Oo .o, p a a O� � z a o o v� F ai 3 0 w t bA bA bA bA C� W Et: W W W W E a U U A U U U U z ID yo 0 o E to C7ow vj c. a a. o o �, p, ai �° S v� ° 04 c G v `r' E w > a� -, .�e b 'w w u 3 u � E M uw O O E c09 u E U u 0❑ CA 2 �C Y' QU O 0 C4 C t7 o u5: U S° 0O , "" Q p G M O > U�� a 047 RESOLUTION 2003- A RESOLUTION OF THE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES FOR A 175,200 SQUARE FOOT SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND ADAMS STREET CASE: SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066 APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 7th day of October, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by THOMAS ENTERPRISES for approval of a Specific Plan to allow a 175,200 square foot shopping center on 17.4± acres at the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street in the CR (Regional Commercial) zone district, more particularly described as: APN's: 649-020-043, -063, -064, and -065 WHEREAS, the La Quinta Community Development Department has completed Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and based upon this Assessment, the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment; therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact is recommended. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted with the Riverside County Recorder's office on August 26, 2003, as required by Section 15072 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on the 9" day of September, 2003, did consider this request, and recommend to the -City Council approval of the Specific Plan by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 2003-067; and, WHEREAS, on July 31, 2003, the Community Development Department mailed case file materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment on the proposed project. All written comments are on file with the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the Public Hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on September 16, 2003, for the City Council meeting as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public Hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and S:\CityMgr\STAFF REPORTS ONLY\PH2 SP Reso.doc 049 City Council Resolution 2003 - Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Adopted: October 7, 2003 Page 3 4. That upon approval of Specific Plan 2003-066, Specific Plans 99-033 and 99-036 (for the easterly portion of this property) shall be void and of no effect on the subject property. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held this 7th day of October, 2003, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: DON ADOLPH, Mayor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JUNE S. GREEK, CITY CLERK City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: M. KATHERINE JENSON, City Attorney P:\stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sp 03-066 cc res.doc 051 Resolution 2003 - Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: October 7, 2003 Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08- DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs five (5) acres or more of land, or that disturbs less than five (5) acres of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than five (5) acres of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off-site grading being done in relation to this project. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC): 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on'site or offsite grading, pursuant to this project. F. The approved SWPPP and BMP's shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the 053 sp 03-066 cc coa Page 2 of 17 Resolution 2003 - Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval - Recommended Adopted: October 7, 2003 A. Highway 1 1 1 (State - Major Arterial) - 50 -foot from the R/W-P/L. B. Adams Street and Corporate Centre Drive (Secondary Arterial/Collector) - 10 -foot from the R/W-P/L. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. 12. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, and common areas on the Final Map. 13. Direct vehicular access to Highway 1 1 1 from lots with frontage along Highway 1 1 1 is restricted, except for those access points identified on the Specific Plan, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final map. 14. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 15. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, of any existing right-of- way, or access easement, the recordation of the tract map is subject to the applicant providing an alternate right-of-way or access easement, to 'those properties, or notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 16. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Specific Plan and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. FINAL MAPS 17. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker on 'a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program. 055 sp 03-066 oc coa Page 4 of 17 Resolution 2003 - Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: October 7, 2003 copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on-site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. 20. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 21. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 22. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off-site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 23. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC. 24. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation. 057 sp 03-066 oc coa Page 6 of 17 Resolution 2003 - Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: October 7, 2003 29. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 30. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.6O.24O(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches 0 .5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 31. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 32. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from the building pads in adjacent developments. 33. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development. Building pad elevations on contiguous interior lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots that do not share a common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 34. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 35. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyors 5 sp 03-066 cc coa Page 8 of 17 Resolution 2003 - Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: October 7, 2003 43. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 44. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 45. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 46. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. A. OFF-SITE STREETS 1) Highway 1 1 1 (Major Arterial - State; 140' R/W): No widening of the north side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Specific Plan is required for its ultimate width as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions except at locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate: a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit) Other required improvements in the right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area include: a) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs. 061 sp 03-066 cc coa Page 10 of 17 Resolution 2003 - Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: October 7, 2003 1) Primary Entry (Highway 1 1 1, 800 feet east of Adams Street): Right turn in, Right turn out. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 2) Secondary Entry (Highway 1 1 1, 420 feet east of Adams Street): Right turn in, Right turn our. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. 3) Shared Entry (Highway 1 1 1, east of the easterly property line: Full turn movements are allowed at the existing signalized intersection of Highway 111 and La Quinta Drive. B. Adams Street — Limited to single access point as described below: 1) Primary Entry (Adams Street, 400 feet north of Highway 1 1 1): Full turn movements are allowed until traffic conditions at the entry warrant traffic installation at which time left turn restrictors shall be installed by the applicant. Prior to issuance of first permit for street improvements, the applicant shall post a bond or money, to pay for the reconfiguration of the intersection on Adams Street between Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street should traffic conditions warrant traffic signal installation a tFaf ;^ ^F01318MG OGGU• within the first five years after a certificate of occupancy has been issued to the first building, as determined by the Engineering Department. The bond shall cover the cost of constructing the traffic restrictors. At the end of the five years, if traffic conditions do not warrant traffic signal installation should Re substaRtial GenreFp,-. be Fea;;Q, the bond/money shall be released to the applicant. C. Corporate Centre Drive — Limited to single access point as described below: 1) Primary Entry (Corporate Centre Drive, 300' east of Adams Street): Full turn movements are allowed. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). 48. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20 -year life pavement, and the site-specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: 063 sp 03-066 cc coa Page 12 of 17 Resolution 2003 - Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: October 7, 2003 54. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention and basins, shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 55. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. PUBLIC SERVICES 56. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit Agency and approved by Caltrans and the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 57. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 58. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and suc-h other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 59. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 60. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. 065 sp 03-066 cc coa Page 14 of 17 Resolution 2003 - Specific Plan 2003-066 - Thomas Enterprises Conditions of Approval — Recommended Adopted: October 7, 2003 71. The Specific plan shall be revised to require a Conditional Use Permit for gas stations and uses with drive through lanes. FIRE MARSHAL 72. Approved super fire hydrants shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. 73. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations. 74. Fire Department connections shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than 50 feet from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the street side of the buildings. 75. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City plan check. 76. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 77. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or larger to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be submitted to the Fire Department. 78. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 79. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of the 1 s` floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. 80. Any commercial operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a Hood/duct system for fire protection. (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.) 81. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of 13"6" clear and unobstructed. 82. Install a KNOX key box on the building. (Contact the Fire Department for an application) 067 sp 03-066 oc coa Page 16 of 17 CASE MA',P �] ATTACHMENT #3 Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 2003 a. Condition #14: The second paragraph as modi!�ed by the applicant regarding the right to use the La Qynnta Resort Hotel amenities contained in the contract between the La Quinta Resort Hotel and Centex Destinatior! Properties. b. Condition #26: Modified to restrict any commercial towers from the Planning Areas and all satellite dishes shall not exceed 18 -inches in size. i C. Condition added: The Specific /Plan shall be amended deleting Bullet #3 of Section 3.5`.1 of the Specific Plan and adding that all substantial a�hitectural changes shall be reviewed and approved by the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee and Pl#nning Commission. d. Condition added: The �'pecific Plan shall be amended to replace the 420 squ a foot minimum livable area with 1,300 square feet indicated in the Site Development Permit. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioneri Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT:��m missioners Abels and Daniels. ABSTAIN: None. f 13. There being no urther discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissiof; ers Tyler/Quill to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2f03-064 approving Tentative Tract Map 31379, as recommen d. i ROLL CALL: AYES: ommissioners Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. BSENT: Commissioners Abels and Daniels. ABSTAIN: None 14. Th re being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by C mmissioners Tyler/Quill to adopt Planning Commission esolution 2003-065 approving Site Development Permit 2003- 78, as recommended. ROLL CAL : AYES: Commissio Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: N . - IT: Commissioners Abels and Daniels. ABSTAIN: None. E. Environmental Assessment 2003-481 and Specific Plan 2003-066; a request of Thomas Enterprises for consideration of: 1) certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; 2) review of 070 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\9-9-03WO.doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 2003 3. Commissioner Quill asked if there were any site plans for the future post office. Staff stated no. Commissioner Quill noted the traffic problems on Adams Street with the High School traffic in the mornings and afternoons. 4. Chairman Kirk asked about the potential of closing the access on Adams Street closest to Highway 1 1 1. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated they considered closing it and moving it further north, but determined that if there was a signal at Corporate Center Drive with a median, it would eliminate a lot of the problems. A suggestion would be to install a median and control the turning movements to be right in and out only, but the General Plan does not allow this. Another suggestion would be to condition the project to install turning movement barriers within a five year period. He would prefer to see the signal installed first before making that determination. 5. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Mike Peroni, The Keith Companies, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. He noted the accesses existed with the prior approvals and the prior Specific Plan did require a prorata share of the signal costs. Mr. Rob Parker, RGA, landscape architect for the project, clarified on the plant pallet along Highway 1 1 1 that it would conform to the Highway 1 1 1 Design Guidelines. Mr. William Sharen, architect for the project, gave a presentation on the projects architecture. He noted the treatment to the back of the building area. 6. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked if anything prevented making the cul- de-sac a through access. Mr. Sharen stated they have no objection and would prefer to have it open. Planning Manager Oscar Orci stated it was staff's understanding the emergency only access was proposed by the applicant. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated the World Gym does not have adequate parking and it was the intent to utilize parking from the adjoining uses on the subject property. His concern is that this is a service area and it could be a safety problem. 071' G:IWPDOCSIPC Minutesl9-9 O3WD.doc 10 Planning Commission Minutes September 9, 2003 conditioned to be resolved in five years if there is a problem. If the signal solves the problem, no further improvements would be required. Mr. Nicole Criste, consultant planner, stated the Mitigated Monitoring Report requires it be solved before a grading permit can be issued. If it requires an additional study, the City Engineer can require it. The turning movements must be restricted unless it can be proven otherwise to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 14. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any discussion regarding issue two, the cul-de-sac by World Gym. Commissioners discussed the advantages/disadvantages of opening the cul-de-sac. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated there is a parking problem and to alleviate it the City has allowed parking on Corporate Center Drive. 15. Chairman Kirk noted the last issue is the drive-thrus. He asked if the Specific Plan could be conditioned to not allow them until such time as the Planning Commission has considered the proposed changes to the Zoning Code in regard to drive-thrus. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston stated that under the Specific Plan, the drive-thru and gas stations could be required to file a conditional use permit application. 16. Commissioner Quill stated it didn't sound fair to allow this applicant to have drive-thrus when they were approved for other applicants. They do appear to be screening it appropriately. He would be open to the conditional use permit process. 17. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Quill to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-066 certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2003-481, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Abels and Daniels. ABSTAIN: None. 18. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Quill to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-067, approving Specific Plan 2003-065, as recommended by staff and amended. 074 GAWPDOMPC Minutes19-9-03WD.doc 12 ATTACHMENT #4 t z U r 0 N zi g CL W Q zz C J W m IL 076 $I r14al z U r 0 N zi g CL W Q zz C J W m IL 076 0 0 O O O ❑ C? M a 8 Q co N Q d W Z W N 0 H 8 EE n7g Y'Z1 w ti a z 0 5 w J LU 0 o� w a H IL w V z 0 C.) r z OQ gZ �° aQ zv O� J - Q a CL W N W N Q n W luul U) 0 s E6 8 w F 090 City of La Qui !a - REQUEST FC 7 COMMENTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT P. O. Box 1504, La Quinta, CA 92253 * (760) 777-7125 - (7°60) 777-1233 (fax) FROM PROJECT PLANNER: STAN SAWA, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE: JULY 31, 2003 XX The City of La Quinta is conducting an initial environmental study pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the referenced project(s). Attached is the information submitted by the project proponent. Your comments are requested with respect to: 1 .) Physical impacts the project presents on public resources, facilities, and/or services, and 2.) Recommended conditions that your agency believe would mitigate any potential adverse effects. If you find that the identified impacts will have significant adverse effects on the environment which cannot be avoided through conditions, please recommend the scope and focus of additional study(ies) which may be helpful. The project is exempt or has previously been reviewed pursuant to CEQA. Please submit any development related conditions you want the City to impose on the project. CASE(S): EA 2003-481 and Specific Plan 2003-066, Thomas Enterprises c/o The Keith Companies LOCATION: Northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street DESCRIPTION: Environmental Review for Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and approval of Specific Plan for 175,200 square foot shopping center (The Pavilion at La Quinta). AGENCIES REQUESTED TO RESPOND: X Imperial Irrigation District X Southern California Gas Company X Coachella Valley Water District X Waste Management of the Desert X Verizon X Sunline Transit U. S. Postal Service - La Quinta X Riverside County Fire Marshal X Riverside County Sheriff's Dept. X Time Warner Cable X City of Desert Sands Unified School District Coachella Valley Unified School District C.V. Archaeological Society Building Industry - Desert Council La Quinta Chamber of Commerce C.V. Recreation & Parks District C.V. Mountain Conservancy U.S. Fish & Wildlife Department of'Fish & Game Caltrans Interoffice Administration & Departments: X City Manager _ Assistant City Manager X Community Development Staff (5) X Public Works X Building and Safety Community Services Your response is requested prior to AUGUST 21, 2003. A Development Review Committee meeting will be held at La Quinta City Hall on N.A. If you have any questions, please contact the noted project planner. PLEASE RETURN DOCUMENT(S) OR PLAN(S) IF YOU DO NOT NEED THEM. THANK -YOU. Comments made by: Date: Phone #: Title: Agency/Division: Comments Attached: P:\STAN\sp 03-066 thomas\sp 03-066 ea 03-481 request for comments.wpd ! .-