SP 121-E La Quinta Resort (1995) - Amendment 3PC/CC RESOS
AI
RESOLUTION 95-56
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
AMENDMENT #3 TO SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT 43)
KSL LA QUINTA HOTEL CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Hotel was originally built in 1926; and,
WHEREAS, the County of Riverside approved Specific Plan 121-E/EIR 41 (La
Quinta Cove Golf Club) in 1975, that allowed the expansion of the hotel to include construction of
637 condominium units, 420 hotel rooms, 27 -hole golf course with clubhouse, and related service
facilities on +619 acres; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quints did adopt Specific Plan 121-E,
Revised, as set forth in City Council Resolution 85-24 on October 5, 1982, allowing the master plan
to be amended to permit an additional 279 condominium units and 146 hotel rooms; and,
—' WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did amend the adopted
Specific Plan in 1988 (Amendment 1) and 1989 (Amendment 2) permitting additional enlargement
and modification to the Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 27th day
of June, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of the Hotel Association
of Palm Springs to amend the aforementioned specific plan to allow a new 16,000 square foot
ballroom and other associated facilities including a new sub -level parking garage; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did on the 5th day of July,
1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of the Hotel Association of Palm
Springs to amend the aforementioned specific plan to allow a new 16,000 square foot ballroom and
other associated facilities including a new sub -level parking garage, more particularly described as
follows:
A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF
SECTION 36, T5S, R6E, S.B.B.M.
WHEREAS, said Specific Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of
"The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended
(Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Director conducted an Initial Study, and
has determined that the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not have a significant adverse
impact on the environment; and, -
REsocc 157
S iL "1 ill 'YI A• ■€4 3 t
0 0
Resolution 95-56
WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the
following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation of the specific plan amendment:
That Revised Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment #3, as conditionally approved, is consistent
with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Municipal Zoning
Code.
2. The proposed amendment is necessary to allow for the orderly development of proposed
Revised Specific Plan 121-E.
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 Council in
this case.
2.That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment 95-304, indicating
that the proposed specific plan amendment will not result in any significant environmental
impacts, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration should be filed.
3, That it does hereby approve of the above-described amendment request subject to approval
of Plot Plan 95-555 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
PASSED APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
City Council held on this 5th day of July, 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff,
Mayor Pena
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None ( � a
JOA ENA, Nlayor
City of La Quinta, California
KESOCC 157
Resolution 95-56
ATT T:
'I
UNDRA L. JUHOVA,7City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DAWN HONEYWELL, City Attomey
City of La Quinta, California
RESOCC. 157
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL • FINAL
SP 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT 3)
LA QUINTA HOTEL BALLROOM
JULY 5, 1995
GENERAL
1. Specific Plan 121-E, Revised (Amendment 3) shall comply with the requirements and standards of the La
Quinta Municipal Code and all other applicable laws in effect at the time of approval of this project unless
otherwise modified by the following conditions. Upon acceptance by the City Council, the City Clerk is
_ authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against
the properties to which they apply.
2. This specific plan approval shall expire and become void on June 27, 1997, unless extended pursuant to the
City's Zoning Ordinance.
3. This approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable provisions of Plot Plan 95-
555.
4. The total number of single family homesihotel rooms that will be allowed in the Specific Plan area shall be
1,494 (i.e., 775 units, 719 rooms).
CONAPRVL.157
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -ADOPTED
PLOT PLAN 95.555 (LA QUINTA HOTEL BALLROOM)
JUNE 27, 1995
Modified by the Planning Gommission on 6.27.95
** Added by the Planning Commission on 6.27.95
GENERAL
1. Plot Plan 95.555 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the La Quinta Municipal Code and all
other applicable laws in effect at the time of approval of this project unless otherwise modified by the
following conditions. Upon acceptance by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these
Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which
they apply.
This plot plan approval shall expire and become void on June 27, 1996, unless extended automatically
pursuant to the City's Updated Zoning Ordinance.
3. This approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable provisions of Specific Plan
121-E Revised (Amendment #3).
4. The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist immediately upon discovery of any archaeological remains
or artifacts and employ appropriate mitigation measures during project development.
All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.210 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designed to minimize
light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and
approval by the Community Development Department.
6. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the
Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and
mitigation measures of the Environmental Impact Report prepared for Specific Plan 83.002 and Plot Plan
95.555, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building
permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director
demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of The Environmental
Impact Report prepared for Specific Plan 83.002 and Plot Plan 95.555, which must be satisfied prior to the
issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and
submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining
Conditions of Approval and mitigating measures of the Environmental Impact Report prepared for Specific
Plan 83.002 and Plot Plan 95-555. The Community Development Director may require inspections or other
monitoring to assure such compliance.
If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the conditions of approval, a
phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer.
CONAPRVL.154
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 (La Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved
phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior
to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a subphasing plan is
approved by the City Engineer.
8. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by
this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits andlor clearances from the following public agencies:
- — Fire Marshal
Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
Community Development Department
Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
Desert Sands Unified School District
Coachella Valley Water District
Imperial Irrigation District
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If
the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior
to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans.
Evidence of permits or clearances from the above jurisdictions shall be presented to the Building Department
at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith.
9. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee
program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
10. Site improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" X 36" media. All
plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer and are not approved for construction until they are
signed.
If water and sewer plans are included on the site improvement plans, the plans shall have an additional
signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD
prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature.
IMPROVEMENTS
11. Prior to issuance of any permit for construction of structures or site improvements approved or required
under this plot plan, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for
applicant's required share of future improvements to be constructed by others (deferred improvements).
CONAPRVL.154
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 (La Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
Deferred improvements for this development include:
A.* One half of the cost, or $25,000, whichever is less, for design and installation of median
landscaping and irrigation improvements in Eisenhower Street for the full length of the La Quints
Hotel frontage. The City will credit the applicant for the previous costs incurred by Landmark Land
Company when they prepared landscape plans for the median on Eisenhower Drive a few years ago.
The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the deferred improvements may, at the City's option, be
- satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject
to such a program.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
12. Improvement plans for all on- and off-site streets, access gates and parking lots shall be prepared by a
registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta
Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings, and as approved by the City Engineer.
Pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design procedure for a 20 -year life and shall consider soil
strength and anticipated traffic loading, including site and building construction traffic. The minimum
pavement sections shall be as follows:
Residential and Parking Areas
3.0"14.5"
Collector
4.0"15.00"
Secondary Arterial
4.0"16.00"
Primary Arterial
4.5"16.00"
Major Arterial
5.5"16.50"
If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section which will be subjected to traffic, the
partial section shall be designed with the 20 -year design strength.
GRADING
13. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be
planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved
by the Community Development and Public Works Departments.
14. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted. The
report of the investigation ("the soils report") shall be submitted with the grading plan.
15. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of the City
Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit.
CONAPRVL.154
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 ILa (luinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as
adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist.
16. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall submit and receive
approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, La Guinta Municipal Code.
In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an
amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit.
- - 17. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant shall provide a separate document bearing the seal and
signature of a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building
pad elevations. The document shall, for each building pad in the development, state the pad elevation
approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data
shall be organized by development phase and lot number and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at
different times.
DRAINAGE
18. All 100 -year storm water run-off shall be retained on-site unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
The tributary drainage area for which the developer is responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent
public streets.
LANDSCAPING
20. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape
and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval
by the City Engineer if landscaping is adjacent to a public street(s). The plans are not approved for
construction until they have been approved and signed by the Community Development Director or City
Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. The plans
shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect.
MAINTENANCE
21. The applicant or applicant's successors in ownership of the property shall ensure perpetual maintenance of
private street and drainage facilities, landscaping, and other improvements required by these conditions.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
22. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction
inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for the
plan checks and permits.
CONAPRVL.154
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95555 (La Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
FIRE MARSHAL
23. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 4000 gpm for a three hour duration at 20
psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job
site.
24. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6" X 4" X 2%") located not less than 25 -
feet or more than 165 -feet from any portion of the buildings► as measured along approved vehicular travel
ways.
25. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicantldeveloper shall furnish one blue line copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and
spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans must be signed by a registered Civil
Engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the
water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department."
26. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to the start of
construction.
27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13 Ordinary Hazard Occupancy, Group I. The post indicator
valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 -feet of a hydrant, and a
minimum of 25 -feet from the building.
28. System plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for review, along with a planlinspection fee. The
approved plans, with Fire Department job card must be at the job site for all inspections.
29. Install a manual pull, smoke detection and voice evacuation fire alarm system as required by the Uniform
Building Code/Riverside County Fire Department and National Fire Protection Association Standards 72.
30. Install Knox Key Lock Boxes, Models 4400, 3200, or 1300, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox
Company. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval of mounting location/position and
operating standards. Special forms are available from this office for the ordering of the Key Switch, this
form must be authorized and signed by this office for the correctly coded system to be purchased.
31. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the
Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new
codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve (12) months.
32. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A1OBC in rating. Contact
CONAPRVL.154
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 ILa Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment.
UTILITIES
33. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development shall be
installed underground. High-voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are
exempt from this requirement.
- 34. The applicant shall abandon all unneeded sewer and water service laterals in this development and install
new laterals as required. -
35. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to
construction of the surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench
compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
36. The applicant shall employ site improvement construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
MISCELLANEOUS
37, The developer shall submit an interim parking plan to the Community Development Department for approval
if work on the expansion request is to occur between the months' of January to April. The plan will identify
the parking areas for employees, guests and workers during on-site construction. The plan shall be approved
by the Community Development Director, the City Engineer, and the Fire Marshal before work begins. Special
consideration shall be made to ensure that the development proposal does not affect the surrounding
residents. Parking on Avenida Fernando should be discouraged, if possible.
38. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid within 24 -hours after review of the case
by City Council. The fee is $1,250 plus $78.00 for processing by Riverside County (checks to be made out
to Riverside County).
39. The developer shall submit to the Director of Community Development their existing Transportation Demand
Management Plan for review to insure compliance with Chapter 9.162 of the Municipal Code. A plan
approved by the South Coast Air Quality Management District will meet this requirement.
40.** Metal gates will be installed on the front of the service dock to screen the facility from view of Avenida
Fernando when the recessed bay is not being used for delivery purposes.
CONAPRVL.154
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95-023
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
OF AMENDMENT #3 TO _ SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E,
REVISED
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT #3)
HOTEL ASSOCIATION OF PALM SPRINGS
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Hotel was originally built in 1926; and,
WHEREAS, the County of Riverside approved Specific Plan 121-E%EIR 41 (La
Quints Cove Golf Club) in 1975, that allowed the expansion of the hotel to include construction of
637 condominium units, 420 hotel rooms, 27 -hole golf course with clubhouse, and related service
facilities on +619 acres; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quints did adopt Specific Plan 121-E,
Revised, as set forth in City Council Resolution 85-24 on October 5, 1982, allowing the master plan
to -be amended -to permit an additional 279 -condominium -units and 146 hotel rooms; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did amend the adopted
Specific Plan in 1988 (Amendment l) and 1989 (Amendment 2) permitting additional enlargement
and modification to the Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 27th day
of June, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of the Hotel Association
of Palm Springs to amend the aforementioned specific plan to allow a new 16,000 square foot
ballroom and other associated facilities including a new sub -level parking garage, more particularly
described as follows:
A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF
SECTION 36, T5S, R6E, S.B.B.M.
WHEREAS, said Specific Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of
"The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended
(Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Director conducted an Initial Study, and
has determined that the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not have a significant adverse
impact on the environment; and,
PESOPC 149
Planning Commission Resolution 95-023
WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find
the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation of the specific plan amendment:
1, That Revised Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment #3, as conditionally approved, is consistent
with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Municipal Zoning
Code.
2. The proposed amendment is necessary to allow for the orderly development of proposed
Revised Specific Plan 121-E.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City
of La Quinta, California as follows:
That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case.
2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment 95-304, indicating
that the proposed specific plan amendment will not result in any significant environmental
impacts, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration should be filed.
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the. above-described
amendment request subject to approval of Plot Plan 95-555 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution.
PASSED APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 27th day of June, 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Abels, Barrows, Butler, Newkirk, and Chairman Adolph
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Anderson and Gardner
ABSTAIN: None
A'
HEaN, Community Development Director
La Oui, California
RESOPC.149
(tw
DON AD J)LPH, Offairman
City of La Quinta, California
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - ADOPTED
SP 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT 3)
(LA QUINTA HOTEL BALLROOM)
JUNE 27, 1995
GENERAL
Specific Plan 121-E, Revised (Amendment 3) shall comply with the requirements and standards of the La
Quinta Municipal Code and all other applicable laws in effect at the time of approval of this project unless
otherwise modified by the following conditions. Upon acceptance by the City Council, the City Clerk is
authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against
the'properties to which they apply.
2. This specific plan approval shall expire and become void on June 27, 1997, unless extended pursuant to the
City's Zoning Ordinance.
3. This approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable provisions of Plot Plan 95-
555.
4. The total number of single family homesihotel rooms that will be allowed in the Specific Plan area shall be
1,494 (i.e., 775 units, 719 rooms).
CONAPRU.157
19
RESOLUTION 95.55
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-304 PREPARED FOR PLOT
PLAN 95.555 AND SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT #3)
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95.304
GREG BURKHARTlKSL LA QUINTA HOTEL CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Ouinta, California, did on the 27th day of June,
1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the proposed Plot Plan 95.555 and Specific Plan 121-E, Revised
(Amendment #3) for the La Quinta Resort & Club expansion project; and,
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did approve the
certification of the Environmental Assessment to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 5th day of July, 1995,
hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the proposed Plot Plan 95.555 and Specific Plan 121-E, Revised
(Amendment #3) for the La Quinta Resort & Club expansion project; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did approve the certification of the
Environmental Assessment; and,
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan and Specific Plan amendment have 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 Initial Study EA 95.304; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said plot plan and specific
plan amendment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that a Negative Declaration of
environmental impact should be filed; and,
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested
persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify certification
of said Environmental Assessment:
The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general
welfare of the community, either indirectly or indirectly.
2. The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment 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 a rare
or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory.
RESOCC.15a
� i, � iii ri � .�i Ji ■.i�l 11 � � 1
Resolution 95.55
3. The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment do not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
4. The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment will not result in impacts which are individually limited
or cumulatively considerable.
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 Council for this
environmental assessment.
2. That it does hereby recommend certification of Environmental Assessment 95-304 for the reasons set forth
in this resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, labeled Exhibit
"A", contained in the staff report.
PASSED APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this
5th day of July, 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Bangerter, Cathcart, Perkins, Sniff,
Mayor Pena
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
o�,o,,L
JO PEVA, or
City of La Quinta, California
City of La Quinta, California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DAWN HONEYWELL, ity Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
RESOCC.158
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95.022
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA
QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-304
PREPARED FOR PLOT PLAN 95-555 AND SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED
(AMENDMENT #3)
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95.304
GREG BURKHARTIKSL LA QUINTA HOTEL CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of June,
1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the proposed Plot Plan 95-555 and Specific Plan 121-E, Revised
(Amendment a3) for the La Quinta Resort & Club expansion project; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did approve the certification
of the Environmental Assessment to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan and Specific Plan amendment have 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 Ruinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared Initial Study EA 95-304; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said plot plan and specific
plan amendment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that a Negative Declaration of
environmental impact should be filed; and,
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested
persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find,the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify
certification of said Environmental Assessment:
The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general
welfare of the community, either indirectly or indirectly.
The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment 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 a rare
or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory.
3. The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment do not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
4. The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment will not result in impacts which are individually limited
or cumulatively considerable.
RESOPC.165
Planning -Commission Resolution 95.022
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
as follows:
That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission for this
environmental assessment.
2. That it does hereby recommend certification of Environmental Assessment 95-304 for the reasons set forth
in this resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, labeled Exhibit
"A" contained in the project file.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held
on this 27th day of June, 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Abels, Barrows, Butler, Newkirk, and Chairman Adolph
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Anderson and Gardner
ABSTAIN: None
DONALD ADOLkChair n
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
HERMCommunity Development Director
La Qu nl California
RESOPC.165
COUNCIL REPORT
0f`'k"
T4ht 4 QuA& F I L
AGENDA CATEGORY:
COUNCILIRDA MEETING DATE: July 5, 1995
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing on Specific Plan 121-E, Revised
(Amendment 3) and Acceptance of Plot Plan 95-555;
Approval of a Specific Plan Amendment to allow the
elimination of a part of the northern parking lot of the La
Quinta Resort Club, and Plot Plan approval to allow
construction of a 37,000 sq. ft. building addition, which
includes a ballroom, supplemental facilities, and
subterranean garage parking in the R-3 Zone on part of a
17.8 acre site located on the south side of Avenida
Fernando, 1,000 ft. west of Eisenhower Drive. Applicant:
KSL La Quinta Hotel Corporation
` # ri it ► � � �If7►1A
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR:
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
1 Adopt Council Resolution certifying the Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impact,
2. Adopt Council Resolution approving Amendment #3 to Specific Plan 121-E, (Revised), and
3. Accept the action of the Planning Commission on Plot Plan 95-555, or modity as Council
desires.
None
The La Quinta Hotel was developed in the 1920's. In 1975, the hotel complex was allowed to be
expanded to 637 condominium units, 496 hotel rooms, 27 -hole golf course and other supplemental
facilities on 619 acres by the County of Riverside (Attachment 1). In 1982, the La Quinta City
Council allowed an additional expansion request that allowed 279 additional condominium units
and 146 hotel rooms (Attachment 2). Since this time, additional modifications have been made.
A summary of this process is attached in the original Planning Commission report (Attachment 3).
ccgt.113
In May, staff received a request by the applicant to develop a new north wing to the La Quinta
Resort & Club. The addition will include a 16,000 sq. ft. ballroom and other supplemental indoor
facilities (i.e., 37,000 sq. ft. addition). The new proposal is located on the south side of Avenida
Fernando, 1000 -feet west of Eisenhower Drive. The building is located north of the existing hotel
restaurants (i.e., Morgan's and Adobe Grill). The addition is planned to be located in a portion of
the existing northernmost 324 space parking lot, however, to mitigate the loss of parking, a
subterranean parking garage is proposed.
The new building is rectangular and measures approximately 185 -feet by 240 -feet. The single
story addition is approximately the same height as the existing two-story facility to the south that
contains both Morgan's and the Adobe Grill restaurants and to the east the Plaza Shops. The total
height of the structure varies from 32 -feet to 39 -feet for the tower elements. The architectural
theme is consistent with the Spanish -style character (1920's Theme Architecture) of the existing
hotel. This height is less than 50 -feet and permissible by the existing Zoning Code.
A Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact is proposed for this project. Staff used
the previous environmental information for the project, and the information from the City's 1992
General Plan Update/EIR.
On June 27th, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the development request. The
Commission took testimony from some residents who reside in the gated residential complexes
surrounding the site (e.g., Santa Rosa Cove, Estados, Enclave, etc.). Those that spoke or
submitted written letters were concerned about the expansion request because they felt the new
addition would create. more traffic on Avenida Fernando (a private two-way street) or in their
neighborhoods, create additional noise, or other related problems (Attachment 4). These issues
were addressed by staff in the attached Planning Commission report. At the meeting, Mr. Scott
M. Dalecio, representing KSL, spoke of his contacts with those residents that had submitted letters
to staff and the Commission. He submitted letters to the Commission that he had written that
explained the mitigation measures they were willing to do to be a good neighbor to the surrounding
residents. These letters are attached (Attachment 5). He went on to explain their business
practices and their on-site parking needs. Mr. Dalecio stated that their facility had won acclaim
from the South Coast Air Quality District on their Transportation Demand Management Plan. They
would submit this document to staff. However, he stated the La Quinta Resort and Club is
marketed to group business clients. They estimate that 70% of their business is from this type
of customer. Approximately 60% of their clients use alternate modes of transportation to come
to the hotel (Le., bus, taxi, etc.). In the past when the hotel was at a 100% occupancy level, he
stated they did have approximately 50% of the parking lot available to drop-in business other than
the hotel personnel or guests. .
ccgt.113 2
•
•
The Commission was encouraged that the City was installing a traffic signal at Eisenhower Drive
and Avenida Fernando. They felt this would benefit those residents that have to use this road for
access to their homes. The Commission also felt that the loss of parking (76 spaces) was a critical
issue, but they felt the shared parking program was adequate since the City's Zoning Code permits
this type of arrangement. They concluded that the total number of on-site parking spaces during
peak -hour demand (i.e., 1,032 spaces) was important to have and that under normal business
usage it will be adequate for the hotel's needs.
Mr. Tom Hill, representing Ohio Citizen's Investment, stated that his company has reduced the
number of homes in the Santa Rosa Cove development and they would like to benefit from this
reduction by possibly placing additional units on the opposite side of Eisenhower Drive (south of
50th Avenue) on property they own in this master planned development. He felt the ' hotel should
not be given their credits. Staff explained to the Commission that the specific plan only allows
110 units at this time, and any change would require an amendment to the plan with or without
the reduction proposed in Condition #4 of the Specific Plan Amendment. Mr. Hill was advised to
provide his information on this issue in the future if he believes the 110 units proposed are not
economically feasible for this vacant property.
Mr. Puget, property owner to the north of the hotel, stated that he had met with Mr. Dalecio and
resolved many issues he had initially when he reviewed the preliminary plans in May. He stated
that he supports the project. However, he would like KSL to fulfill the Conditions of Approval
proposed and monitor their concerns once they build the facility. Mr. Puget hoped the new
landscaping proposed by KSL would reduce the overall visual impact of the large structure.
The Commission voted to approve the request provided the attached conditions were imposed.
The final vote was 5-0 (Commissioners Gardener and Anderson absent). The Commission modified
Condition #11.A. because Mr. Dalecio explained Landmark Land had expended money a few years
ago designing a landscape plan for Eisenhower Drive. The Commission felt KSL was entitled to
a credit (against the request of staff for $25,000) for this purpose. The Commission also added
Condition #40 that requires screening of the service bay that faces Avenida Fernando.
Findings necessary to approve the project can be made and are contained in the attached material.
1. The proposed project will not impose a significant impact on the environment and a
Mitigated Negative Declaration has been recommended by the Planning Commission.
2. That the project conditions are deemed necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare
of the community.
3. That the proposed expansion request is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning
Code as designed.
4. The specific plan amendment is consistent with the policies and guidelines of Specific Plan
121-E and previous amendments.
ccM.1 13 3
•
The options available to the Council are as follows:
1. Approve the request;
2. Modify the attached Conditions of Approval;
3. Deny the request; or,
4. Continue the request to your next meeting (July 18).
arry Icer an
ommufity Development Director
Attachments:
1. 1975 Specific Plan Exhibit
2. 1982 Specific Plan Exhibit
3. Excerpt from June 27th P.C. Report
4. Letters of Opposition
5. Letters from Mr. Scott M. Dalecio
ccgL113
4
•
RESOLUTION 95-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95.304 PREPARED FOR PLOT
PLAN 95-555 AND SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT #3)
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-304
GREG BURKHARTIKSL LA QUINTA HOTEL CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City -of La Quinta, California, did on the 27th day of June;
1995, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the proposed Plot Plan 95.555 and Specific Plan 121-E, Revised
(Amendment #3) for the La Quinta Resort & Club expansion project; and,
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did approve the
certification of the Environmental Assessment to the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 5th day of July, 1995,
hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the proposed Plot Plan 95-555 and Specific Plan 121-E, Revised
(Amendment #3) for the La Quinta Resort & Club expansion project; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California did approve the certification of the
Environmental Assessment; and,
WHEREAS, said Plot Plan and Specific Plan amendment have 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 Initial Study EA 95.304; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said plot plan and specific
plan amendment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that a Negative Declaration of
environmental impact should be filed; and,
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested
persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify certification
of said Environmental Assessment:
The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general
welfare of the community, either indirectly or indirectly.
2. The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment 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 a rare
or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory.
5
RESOCC.158
0
Resolution 95-
3. The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment do not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals, to the disadvantage of longterm environmental goals.
4. The proposed plot plan and specific plan amendment will not result in impacts which are individually limited
or cumulatively considerable.
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 Council for this
environmental assessment.
2. That it does hereby recommend certification of Environmental Assessment 95-304 for the reasons set forth
in this resolution and as stated in the attached Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, labeled
Exhibit "A".
PASSED APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this
5th day of July, 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JOHN PEVA, Mayor
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DAWN°HONEYWELL, City Attorney
City of La Quinta; California
RESOCC.158 6
INITIAL STUDY -ADDENDUM
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-304
Prepared for:
Plot Plan 95-555/SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT 3#)
Greg Burkhart/KSL
La Quinta Resort & Club
La Quinta, California
Prepared by:
Community Development Department
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
June 20, 1995
7
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
F�
Section
Page
1
INTRODUCTION
3
1.1 Project Overview
3
1.2 Purpose of Initial Study
3
1.3 Background of Environmental Review
4
1.4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review
4
2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
4
2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting
4
2.2 Physical Characteristics
4
2.3 Operational Characteristics
4
2.4 Objectives
4
2.5 Discretionary Actions
5
2.6 Related Projects
5
3
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
5
3.1 Land Use and Planning
5
3.2 Population and Housing
7
3.3 Earth Resources
8
3.4 Water
10
3.5 Air Quality
13
3.6 Transportation/Circulation
16
3.7 Biological Resources
18
3.8 Energy and Mineral Resources
19
3.9 Risk of Upset/Human Health
20
3.10 Noise
21
3.11 Public Services
22
3.12 Utilities
24
3.13 Aesthetics
26
3.14 Cultural Resources
27
3.15 Recreation
29
4
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
29
5
EARLIER ANALYSIS
30
8
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The La Quinta Resort and Hotel has submitted an application for plot plan review of a
proposed 37,000 square foot building addition, which includes a 16,000 square'foot
ballroom, and supplemental facilities with a subterranean parking garage. The ballroom is
proposed to be constructed in an existing parking lot on the north side of the resort
complex. The building will feature parking underneath in order to accommodate required
parking needsThe assumed density of the proposed ballroom is 12 square feet per seat, or
1,333 seats.
The City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency for the project review, as defined by Section
21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Lead Agency is the public
agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which
may have a significant effect upon the environment. The City of La Quinta, as the Lead
Agency, has the authority to oversee the environmental review and to approve the
proposed development.
1.2 PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY
As part of the environmental review for the ballroom, the City of La Quinta Community
Development Department has prepared this Initial Study. This document provides a basis
for determining the nature and scope of the subsequent environmental review for the
proposed ballroom. The purposes of the initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the
CEQA Guidelines, include the following:
To provide the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to
prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) or a negative declaration for the
ballroom construction;
To enable the applicant or the City of La Quinta to modify the project, mitigating
adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a
mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact;
To assist the preparation of an EIR, should one be required, by focusing the
analysis on those issues that will be adversely impacted by the proposed project;
To facilitate environmental review early in the design of the project;
To provide documentation for the findings in a negative declaration that the
project will not have a significant effect on the environment;
To eliminate unnecessary EIR's; and
N
e
•
Cm
To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project.
1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project was deemed subject to the environmental review requirements of
CEQA in light of the proposed construction of the ballroom The Environmental Officer
for the Community Development Department prepared this Initial Study and addendum
for review and certification by the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta.
1.4 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This Initial Study indicates that there is a potential for adverse environmental impacts on
some of the issue areas contained in the Environmental Checklist. Mitigation measures
have been recommended in a Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) which will reduce
potential impacts to insignificant levels. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project. An EIR will not be necessary.
SECTION 2, PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of La Quinta is a 31.18 square mile municipality located in the southwestern
portion of the Coachella Valley. The City is bounded on the west by the City of Indian
Wells, on the east by the City is bounded on the west by the City of Indio and Riverside
County, on the north by Riverside County, and federal and County lands to the south. The
City of La Quinta was incorporated in 1982.
2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed expansion request will consist of a 37,000 square foot building with
subterranean parking garage below the proposed building. The project site is located in the
Plaza Parking Lot on the north side of the existing hotel and restaurant facilities.
2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
The ballroom will serve large group events such as dances, conventions, private parties,
etc. There will be banquet storage space, general storage space, office space, restrooms,
and a pre -function area.
2.4 OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the proposed ballroom are to accommodate larger groups, increase
revenue with expended facilities, and provide greater flexibility in available facilities.
10
C!
2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
0 S1
A discretionary action is an action taken by a government agency (for this project, the
government agency is the City of La Quinta ) that calls for the exercise of judgment in
deciding whether to approve a project. The proposed project will require discretionary
approval from the Planning Commission for the following:
* Approval of a Plot Plan for the project
* Certification of the Environmental Assessment for the project
2.6 RELATED PROJECTS
There are no current projects related to the proposed ballroom project. The project site is,
however, part of Specific Plan 121-E that was approved prior to the City's incorporation,
by the County of Riverside. There have been several plot plan approvals for new buildings
and amendments to the Specific Plan over the last ten years. The proposed project for the
ballroom addition requires that there be an amendment to the Specific Plan to permit the
proposed elimination of a part of the existing parking lot where the new building will be
constructed. This amendment is being processed concurrently with the proposed plot plan.
SECTION 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the development
of the new ballroom addition to the La Quinta Resort and Club. CEQA issue areas are
evaluated in this addendum as contained in the initial Study Checklist.
Under each checklist item, the environmental setting is discussed, including a description
of conditions as they presently exist within the City and the areas affected by the proposed
project. Thresholds for significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible
or trustee agencies or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G).
3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, in the eastern portion of
Riverside County. The valley is abundant with both plant and animal life. Topographical
relief ranges from -237 feet below mean sea level (msl) to about 2,000 feet above msl. The
valley is surrounded by the San Jacinto Mountains, the Santa Rosa Mountains, the
Orocopia Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountain range. The San Andreas fault
transects the northeastern edge of the valley.
Local Environmental Setting
The proposed project site is located west of Eisenhower Drive and Southwest of Ave.
Fernando, in the southwestern portion of the City of La Quinta. The project site is part of
the La Quinta Resort and Club complex that was first constructed in the 1920's. The hotel
11
is designated as a historical structure in the City's General Plan. The exact project site is
within an existing parking lot that is adjacent to the hotel and restaurants.
A. Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is within the R-3 zone
classification that permits hotels and accessory conference facilities. The General Plan land
use designation is that of Tourist Commercial (TC). The land use designation and zoning
designation are compatible with each other. Specific Plan 121-E governs that development
of the hotel complex. In order to eliminate a portion of the existing parking lot where the
ballroom will be built, it is necessary to amend the Specific Plan.
B. Would the project conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
No Impact. The City of La Quinta has jurisdiction over this project approval. The
primary environmental plans and policies related to development of the ballroom are
identified in the La Quinta General Plan, the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment,
and Specific Plan 121-E.
The project site is within Redevelopment Area # 1 which includes the Cove area and most
of the southern portion of the City. The redevelopment plan for the area relies upon the
General Plan to indicate the location and extent of permitted development. As a result, the
development of the convention building is also consistent with the adopted
Redevelopment Plan. The development proposed will not exceed the development
standards contained in the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
C. Would the project affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to
soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
No Impact. No agricultural lands are located on the site. No impact on agricultural
resources or operations will result from the proposed project. (Sources: La Quinta
General Plan; Zoning Ordinance; Site Survey)
D. Would the project disrupt or divide the physical arrangement -of an
established community (including a low-income minority community)?
No Impact. The project site will be developed with a 37,000 square foot building and
subterranean parking garage as permitted by the proposed amendment to Specific Plan
121-E and an approved Plot Plan for architectural review. The future ballroom will not
affect the physical arrangement of existing neighborhoods or other types of development
in the La Quinta Cove area of La Quinta. (Sources: Site Survey; Proposed Site Plan)
12
0 0 7
3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Regional Environmental Setting
Between 1980 and 1990, the population of La Quinta expanded 125%, as reported by the
U.S. Census, making it the second fastest growing city in the Coachella Valley. The
number of City residents blossomed from 4,992 to 11,215. La Quinta's share of the entire
valley population increased from 3.7%, in 1980, to 5.1%, in 1990. These figures are based
upon information provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, the State Department of Finance,
and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG).
The City's population as of January, 1994, is estimated by the State Department of
Finance, to be 16,634 persons. This is an increase of 208% in the last ten years. In
addition to permanent residents, the City has approximately 8,000 seasonal residents who
spend three to six months in the City. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the
City are used by seasonal residents. The average occupancy is 2.5 persons per unit.
The housing stock as of 1993, is listed at 7,755 single family units, 481 multi -family units,
and 247 mobile homes, for a total of 8,483 units.
Ethnicity information from the 1980 Census, for the area that is now the City_ of La Quinta
revealed that 80.0% of the La Quinta resident population as caucasian, 14.7% as Hispanic,
2.3% as Afro-American, 1.1% as Asian, and .5% as Native American. The results of the
1990 Census show a mix of 70% Caucasian, 26% Hispanic, 1.6% Afro-American, 1.5%
Asian, and ! .0% Native American.
The most current information available on employment of La Quinta residents is from the
1980 Census. At that time, almost 57% of the La Quinta workforce worked at white collar
jobs, while 43% were in blue collar occupations. The major employers in the City include
the La Quinta Hotel and Resort, PGA West, Vons, Simon Motors, City of La Quinta.
WalMart, Albertson's, and Ralph's.
Local Environmental Setting
The proposed project area is an existing asphalt parking lot.
A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections?
No Impact. The proposed convention facility will result in no new residential units.
Temporary construction jobs will be created if the project is built. New jobs related to the
operation of the future ballroom will also be created.
B. Would the project induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of
major infrastructure)?
13
•
s
I
No Impact. The proposed building will provide a second ballroom facility that will permit
a new large group meeting facility for the City. This will attract additional convention and
conference groups to the hotel which will result in additional bed tax paid to the City. It is
not anticipated that additional development will result from the construction of the
ballroom
C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?
No Impact. There are no housing units on the project site. The proposed ballroom
facilities will be constructed with private funds. (Source: Application Materials; Site
Survey)
3.3 EARTH RESOURCES
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta has a varied topography, from gently sloping alluvial fans, steep
hillsides, to relatively flat desert floor. The alluvial soils that make up most of the City's
soil types are underlain by igneous -metamorphic rock, as seen in outcrops in the Santa
Rosa Mountains and the Coral reef Mountains. Soils on the valley floor are made up of
very fine grain unconsolidated silty sands.
Local Environmental Setting
The area where the project is proposed is a developed resort complex. A review of
historical aerial photographs indicates that the site has had structures on it since the 1920's
when the first hotel building was constructed. The elevation of the project site is
approximately 50 feet above msl. There has been no recorded seismic activity from the
nearby inferred faults, thus, there is a low probability for such activity: The City of La
Quinta lies in a seismically active region of Southern California. Faults in the area include
the San Andreas fault located several miles to the north of the City. Faults within the City
include two inferred faults transecting the southern section of La Quinta.
A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismicity: fault rupture?
Less Than Significant Impact. There are two inferred faults in the southern area of the
City. One fault is located approximately 1.5 miles northeast of the project site, while the
other lies approximately 1.5 miles south. These faults are considered potentially active,
although no activity has been recorded for the last 10,000 years. A major earthquake
along the fault would be capable of generating seismic hazards and strong groundshaking
effects in the area. None of the inferred faults in La Quinta, have been placed in an Alquist-
Priolo Special Studies Zone. Thus, no fault rupture hazard is anticipated for the project
site. ( Source: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan; City of La Quinta General
Plan; City of La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment)
14
B. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismic ground shaking?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed ballroom project will be subject
to groundshaking hazards from regional and local earthquake events. The proposed
project will bring people to the site who will be subject to these hazards. The project site
is within Groundshaking Zone III. The ballroom facilities and subterranean parking garage
will be required to meet current seismic standards to reduce the risk of structural collapse.
C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project site is not anticipated to be subject
to ground failure hazards from earthquake or other events. The La Quinta General Plan
indicates that the project site is not within a recognized liquefaction hazard area. The
majority of the City has a very low liquefaction susceptibility due to the fact that ground
water levels are generally at least 100 feet below the ground surface.
D. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismicity: seiche or tsunami or volcanic hazard?
No Impact. The City is located inland from the Pacific Ocean and would not be subject
to a tsunami. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir located in the southeast area of the
City, might experience some moderate wave activity as a result of an earthquake and
groundshaking. However, the lake is not anticipated to affect the City in the event of a
levee failure or seiche.
E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
landslides or mudslides?
Less Than Significant Impact. The immediate project site is within an existing parking
lot that is several hundred feet away from the Santa Rosa Mountains. Thus, the project
would not be impacted by potential mudslides or landslides.
F. Would the project. result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading or fill?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom facilities, if built, will require
extensive excavation for the subterranean parking garage. Hazard barracades shall be
placed around the excavation site to warn pedestrians of open constriction activities.
15
•
•
EM
G. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
subsidence of the land?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not located in an area which is
considered to have subsidence hazards, according to the La Quinta MEA. Dynamic
settlement results in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated soils mix with
perched groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground. (Source:
La Quinta MEA)
H. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
expansive soils?
Less than Significant Impact. The underlying soils on the project site consist of Indio
Very Fine Sandy Loam (Is) and Gilman Silt Loam (GeA). Is soil has very slow runoff
slight erosion hazard, and no flood hazards associated with it. The shrink/swell capacity is
low. The GeA soil has slow runoff~ slight erosion, and flooding is rare. Shrink/swell is
low. (Source: Soil Survey of Riverside County, California, Coachella Valley Area)
1. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts_ involving
unique geologic or physical features?
Less than Significant Impact. The Coral Reef Mountains and the Santa Rosa Mountains
represent unique geologic features in the La Quinta area. These unique geologic features
are not located within the project site or near enough to the project to be affected by the
proposed ballroom hotel expansion request.
3.4 WATER
Regional Eni,ironmental Setting
Groundwater resources in the La Quinta area consist of a system of large aquifers (porous
layer of rock material) and groundwater basins separated by bedrock or layers of soil that
trap or retain groundwater. La Quinta is located above the Coachella Valley Groundwater
Basin which is the major supply of water for the potable water needs of the City as well as
a significant supply for the City's nonpotable irrigation needs. Water is pumped from the
underground aquifer via thirteen wells in the City operated and administered by the
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). La Quinta is located primarily in the lower
thermal subarea of the groundwater basin. The Thermal Subarea is separated into the
upper and lower valley sub -basins near Point Happy Ranch, located southwest of the
intersection of Washington Street and State Highway 111. CVWD estimates that
approximately 19.4 million acre feet of water is stored within the Thermal Subarea which
is available for use. Water supplies are also augmented with surface water from the
Colorado River transported via the Coachella Canal.
16
4
C. Would the project result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration
of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
Less than Significant Impact. Runoff from the project site will be directed to the
existing drainage system on the resort complex which ultimately terminates in the golf
course lakes.
D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
No Impact. No increase in runoff is expected since the project site is an existing paved
parking lot. The proposed ballroom will not expand the paved area, but rather incorporate
part of the existing paved area into the proposed building site. (Source: Proposed Site
Plan)
E. Would the project result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements?
No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have any substantial bodies of water or
rivers. There are many small man-made lakes and ponds on golf courses within the City.
The Whitewater River and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel are stormwater channels
that are usually dry except for runoff from seasonal storms.
F. Would the project result in changes in quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdraw[, or through interception of an aquifer
by cuts or by excavations?
No Impact. Water supply in the City is derived from groundwater and supplementary
water brought in from the Colorado River. Development of the ballroom will consist of
open meeting area, banquet storage areas, an office area, and restore facilities. Existing
kitchen facilities in the hotel restaurants will be utilized for food preparation: Consumption
calculation indicates that the ballroom would require 8,880 gals./day of water.
G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
No Impact. The proposed project will not have a significant effect on groundwater wells.
It is not anticipated that there will -be any alteration to the direction or rate of flow of the
groundwater supply. No wells are proposed for the project.
H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality?
No Impact. The proposed ballroom will be constructed in an existing paved parking lot,
thus, there will be no additional pavement placed on the hotel site to reduce the absorption
18
0
The quality of water in the City is highly suitable for domestic purposes. However,
chemicals associated with agricultural production in nearby areas and the use of septic
tanks in the Cove area affect groundwater quality. Groundwater is of marginal to poor
quality at depths of less than 200 feet. Below 200 feet, water quality is generally good and
water depths of 400 to 600 feet is considered excellent.
Percolation from the tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the
Santa Ros4 Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial
recharging of groundwater will be a requirement in the near future.
Surface water in La Quinta is comprised of Colorado River water supplied via the
Coachella Canal and stored in Lake Cahuilla; lakes in private development which are
comprised of canal water and/or untreated ground water; and the Whitewater River and its
tributaries. The watersheds in La Quinta are subject to intense storms of short duration
which results in substantial runoff. The steep gradient of the Santa Rosa Mountains
accelerates the runoff flowing in the intermittent streams that drain the mountain
watersheds.
One of the primary sources of surface water pollution is erosion and sedimentation from
development construction and operation activities. Without controls total dissolved solids
(TDS) an increase significantly from the development activities. The Clean Water Act
requires all communities to conform to standards regulating the quality of water
discharged into streams, including stormwater runoff. The National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) has been implemented as a two-part permitting process, for
which the City of La Quinta is participating in completing permitting requirements.
Local Environmental Setting
The proposed project site does not have any standing water on it or near by. The nearest
stands of surface water consist of several small lakes located on the resort golf courses. It
has been calculated that the proposed ballroom facilities will consume 8,880 gallons of
water per day.
A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff?
Less Then Significant Impact. The proposed project will not require additional drainage
facilities. There is an existing drainage system for the resort complex that directs runoff to
the existing golf course lakes.
B. Would the project result in exposure of people or property to water -related
hazards such as flooding?
Less than Significant Impact. The site is within a designated. 100 year flood plain zone
(Zone A). The hazard factors for this zone have not been determined. However, there are
existing flood control facilities in the Cove area that will protect the project site.
17
414
A. Would the project violate any air standard or contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. There will be some pollutants as a result of vehicular
traffic during the construction phases and from employees and visitor to the ballroom-
According
allroomAccording to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Table 6-2, the proposed
project best fits with the Restaurant category under the Commercial land use threshold of
20,000 square feet of area. The proposed building area for the ballroom project will be
37,000 square feet, which is more than the threshold. However, the proposed ballroom
facilities are ancillary to the resort hotel complex. Thus, there would be a significant air
quality impact resulting from the proposed project. The Significance Emission Thresholds
established by the District consist of the following:
55 pounds per day of ROG
55 pounds per day of Nox
274 pounds per day of CO
150 pounds per day of PM10
150 pounds per day of Sox
State 1 -hour or 8 -hour standard for CO
Projects that exceed the above thresholds with daily operation -related emissions (averaged
over a 7 -day week) are considered to be significant. Calculations were made for the
proposed ballroom. A 180 -day construction period was assumed for the following short
term construction impact:
ROG 39.31bs./day
Nox 575.91bs./day
CO 125.2 lbs./day
PM10 40.9 lbs./day
Long Term Mobile Emissions consist of the following:
ROG 225.31bs./day
Nox 97.7 lbs./day
Co 2037.2 lbs./day
PM10 20.0 lbs./day
Long Term consist of the following:
ROG 225.4
Nox 103.2
CO 2038.2
PM10 20.2
SEDAB Thresholds:
20
W
ability of the ground. Stormwater runoff will be directed into the existing drainage system
at the resort which culminates in the golf course lakes.
3.5 AIR QUALITY
Regional Environmental Setting
The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD), and in particular the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB). SEDAB
has a distinctly different air pollution problem than the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). A
discussion of the jurisdictional organization and requirements is found in the La Quinta
MEA)
The air quality in Southern California region has historically been poor due to the
topography, climatological influences, and urbanization. State and federal clean air
standards established by the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) are often exceeded. The SCAQMD is a regional agency charged
with the regulation of pollutant emissions and the maintenance of local air quality
standards. The SCAQMD samples air quality at over 32 monitoring stations in and around
the Basin. According to the 1989 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan, SEDAB
experiences poor air quality, but to a lesser extent that then SCAB. Currently, the SEDAB
does not meet federal standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter. In the
Coachella Valley, the standards for PM 10 are frequently exceeded. PM 10 is particulate
matter 10 microns or less in diameter that becomes suspended in the air due to winds,
grading activity, and by vehicles on unpaved roads, among other causes.
Local Environmental Setting
The City is located in the Coachella Valley, which has a and climate, characterized by hot
summers. mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and low humidity. Variations in
rainfall, temperatures, and localized winds occur throughout the valley due to the presence
of the surrounding mountains. Air quality conditions are closely tied to the prevailing
winds of the region.
The City of La Quinta is subject to the SCAQMD AQMD, a plan which describes
measures to bring the SCAB into compliance with federal and state air quality standards
and to meet California Clean Air Act requirements. The General Plan for the City contains
an Air Quality Element outlining mitigation measures as required by the Regional AQMP.
The City is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes two air quality
monitoring stations, one located in the City of Palm Springs and one in the City of Indio.
The Indio station monitors conditions which are most representative of the La Quinta
area. The station has been collecting data for ozone and particulate matter since 1983. The
Palm Springs station monitors carbon monoxide in addition to ozone and particulate
matter and has been in operation since 1985,
19
•
ROG 75 '
Nox 100
CO 550
PM10 150
Difference: Project and SEDAB Thresholds:
ROG
-150.4
Nox
-48.2
CO
-1488.2
PM10
129.8
Percent Over Thresholds:
ROG
300.5%
Nox
103.2%
CO
370.6%
PM10
13.4%
•
Thus; there is a potential for significant impact from the development of the Ballroom. A
detailed air quality analysis shall be required to be submitted to the Community
Development Department prior to issuance of grading or building permits. The analysis
shall include recommended mitigation measures.
B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive Receptors include schools, day care centers,
parks and recreation areas, medical facilities, rest homes, and other land uses that include
concentrations of individuals recognized as exhibiting particular sensitivity to air pollution.
The adjacent land uses consist of residential and golf development to the immediate west
and south, with scattered residential to the adjacent north. Directly adjacent to the south
is the existing hotel and restaurant complex, to which the proposed ballroom will be
attached.
The closest schools are Truman Elementary school and the La Quinta Middle School
located at the northwest comer of Avenue 50 and Park Avenue. The closest existing park
is the Village park located in the Cove area, south of the project site. The closest known
day care center is the YMCA Preschool located adjacent to Truman Elementary School.
The closest medical facility is a doctors office located on Calle Tampico, near Washington
Street, over a mile from the project site.
C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any
change in climate?
21
It
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any
significant impacts upon this issue area. The proposed ballroom facilities will be required
to meet height and setback requirements, maintaining a compatible architectural style with
the existing structures in the resort complex.
D. Would the project create objectionable odors?
Less Than Significant Impacts. The proposed ballroom is not anticipated to create any
objectionable odors. Food preparation will be done in the existing restaurant kitchens.
There could be some noticeable odors from exhaust emissions from vehicles using the
subterranean parking garage under the ballroom These odor, if detectable at all, will not
be significant.
3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
Regional Environmental Setting
La Quinta is a desert community of over 16,000+ permanent residents. There is a
substantial portion of the City that is undeveloped. The existing circulation system is a
combination of early roadwork constructed by Riverside County and new roadways since
incorporation of the City in 1982. Key roadways include State Highway l 11, Washington
Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, and Eisenhower Drive.
Traffic volumes in La Quinta experience considerable seasonal variation, with the late -
winter, early spring months representing the peak tourist season and highest traffic
volumes.
Existing transit service for the City is limited to three regional fixed -route bus routes
operated by Sunline Transit Agency. One bus route along Washington Street connects the
Cove and Village areas with the community of Palm Desert to the west. Two lines operate
along Highway 111 serving trips between La Quinta and other communities in the desert.
There are some existing pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian facilities in La Quinta, however,
these systems are to be completed as new developments come to the City.
Local Environmental Setting
The project site is within the La Quinta Resort and Club complex, in an existing parking
lot area. The project, as well as the hotel, are accessed by Avenida Fernando, (a private 2 -
way road) located immediately north of the parking lot.
A. Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
Less Than Significant Impact. The ballroom facilities are projected to serve as an
accessory to the existing hotel and resort facilities. The users of the ballroom will for the
22
most part be staying at the hotel. Thus, there should not be any significant increase in
vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
B. Would the project result in hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersection) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm
equipment)?
No Impact. There are currently no hazards from design features of the existing roadway
or the proposed project. The proposed project does not include any new roadways or the
alteration of any existing roadways. It does eliminate a portion of an existing parking lot,
which will alter circulation in the parking lot in order access the underground parking
garage. There are no obvious hazardous design feature associated with the project.
C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom project will not obstruct
emergency access to the surrounding area.
D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
Less Than Significant Impact. A total of 91 parking spaces are proposed in the
underground parking garage. The existing parking lot has 324 spaces, of which 76 will be
eliminated by the new ballroom.. The resort and hotel complex require a total of 1,523
spaces excluding the ballroom since it has been determined that the ballroom is primarily
for on-site guests or patrons. Otherwise, the total number of parking spaces needed would
be 2,923. A shared parking plan is permitted by the Off -Street Parking Code if certain
standards can be met. The shared parking program under Chapter 9.160.035 of the
Municipal Code will permit parking spaces based on a parking analysis with the highest
usage requirement setting the parking requirement. The study indicated that the highest
usage was at 9:00 p.m. with a parking need of 1032 spaces. These standards have been
met in this proposed project. (Source: ULI Analysis; Site Plan)
E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists?
Less Than Significant Impact. Eisenhower Drive, in the vicinity of the resort complex,
is a designated bikeway corridor. The proposed project is not anticipated to have any
impact upon the corridor. Pedestrians crossing the existing parking lot will be required to
go around the ballroom building depending upon the direction in which they are walking.
The existing stamped concrete walkway will be replaced with a new pedestrian arcade
leading to the existing hotel and restaurant buildings. Thus, there should be minimal
impact upon pedestrians or bicyclists. (Source: Proposed Site Plan)
F. Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
23
0
1t
No Impact. The proposed ballroom will not interfere with the existing alternative
transportation modes and facilities or create new modes and facilities at the resort
complex. (Source: Proposed Site Plan)
G. Would the project result in rail, waterborne, or air traffic impacts?
No Impact. There is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. There are no navigable
rivers or waterways, or air travel lanes within the City limits. Thus, there will be no
impacts upon these issues.
3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta lies within the Colorado Desert. Two ecosystems are found within
the City; the Sonoran Desert Scrub and the Desert Transition. The disturbed environments
within the City are classified as urban or agricultural. A discussion of these ecosystems is
found in the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment.
Local Environmental Setting
The project site is located within the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem. Typically,
undeveloped land in this environment is rich in biological resources and habitat. This
ecosystem is the most typical environment in the Coachella Valley. It is generally
categorized as containing plants which have then ability to economize water use, go
dormant during periods of drought, or both. Cacti are very common in these areas due to
their ability to store water. Other plants root deeply and draw upon water from
considerable depths. The variations of desert vegetation result from differences in the
availability of water. The most dense and lush vegetation in the desert is found where
groundwater is most plentiful.
The Sonoran Scrub areas are considered habitat for a number of small mammals and birds.
These animals escape the summer heat through their nocturnal and/or burrowing
tendencies. Squirrels, mice and rats are all common rodent species in this environment.
The black -tailed hare is a typical mammal. Predator species include kit fox, coyote, and
mountain lion in the higher elevations. The largest mammal found in this area is the
Peninsular Big Horn sheep which is found at the higher elevation of the Santa Rosa and
San Jacinto Mountain ranges. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the
Sonoran Scrub area.
The project site is developed and has been for approximately 70 years. Thus, any potential
biological resources or habitat has been long gone from the site. The La Quinta MEA
indicates that the vicinity of the project site is within the traditional habitat of the Black -
tailed Gnatcatcher bird. There is no existing habitat left on the resort complex.
24
•
A. Would the project result in impacts to endangered, threatened, or rare
species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds)?
No Impact. The proposed project site has been developed for approximately 70 years,
thus all habitat has been destroyed. (Source: Site Survey)
B. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated species (e.g. heritage
trees)?
No Impact. There are no locally designated biological resources within the City of La
Quinta. All significant biological resources are designated by the California Department of
Fish & Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site
Survey)
C. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated natural
communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
No Impact. There are no locally designated natural communities found on or near the
project site. Surrounding land uses include golf course, hotel units, single family homes,
restaurants, retail shops, and parking lots.
D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh,
riparian, and vernal pool)?
No Impact. There are no wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal pools within
the City. (Source: La Quinta MEA)
E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration
corridors?
No Impact. There are no known wildlife corridors within the project area. (Source: La
Quinta MEA)
3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta contains both areas of insignificant and significant Mineral
Aggregate Resources Areas (SMARA), as designated by the State Department of
Conservation. There are no known oil resources in the City. Major energy resources used
in the City come from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), Southern California Gas
Company, and gasoline companies.
Local Environmental Setting
25
IROQUOIS DR24 i
I 21
I 2S
f 1� CJrR x I WaSII -.
4 H
~ ' poly; I
_ r ki . }IO opt
i CS 1A 4G r — — -' ONE I LA OUINTA HS
CENTf EfEVEN l57TE1
-" dA
SN IN UfN7A Z
_ Ap 4 y- x�ek sH`pp/Nc
{i�SYyE � 4 P -I S CEON J
Y 3 C%eo/4 'A5 �CAMEO W01B ft 0
r, 7 b SFM NCLE 0 !ti/ATn
3 C
h' O g �q1/ r FJ sAnD n
ft
AAGuUET Cit S cAE aD LN n aaALM � N ra
V 41Y.'i CI e!� aY Dbt
O C r Y
O! LN
I A.0 DE IVY -
7 •nAPAHOE LN -I_ a�}a
ARAPAHOE CT 6 I (� rye/•`Y /�,yA souo I
I AR"ARDE TER �Nr � idllln,r,i� • � r`' 3
I •IIAPANOE OR I I / ��� 7 +`,f "
1 YAVAPA CT 1// l
I
vAON Il 3 rt �p I 7
O
prWWA °"y # Y f I10.GRRiSANNA
r
.4
` rry/rrrr$� I i SOI a �`S+fr I
I I r '
I '115` Y'rlrrfllt\� I i y�5� ly i I TwwuEwwr►
+ —�`,- IR{7A. L r41nm.••
AV {,
SS�UWe�ksR�4L] Cli�2 44 AQUI
1-7— d[�'
I ti-'{ ! a ffil �•1 �
JI *I'I+l r� I a0 .,,• PAS tSARI tel` t
/ 11 µu^y//�I4r 0 •+. I --" y,� +rte I fcputr • InII ' ��5 yF.f`I
I HOUSE
k�HL;17 •,.MA's -I .. - �,, ter`
{ I I r�aii i i tw 1+r
; CY C xNlaNl [i ♦ a te LA Q
!�
UlAV TA
.tlulll C
�+W)AjA 0a +fir • y - E d Ttskn- -A. - _ 1•iSi►' 5s �'y: ti . +
Y��•-' Afrji�ri�c(� q�jdA,y �•��"'I�AN rlM�i�r... �i�l .- � i"` ��� �� �� ., i 1
OVIAWA ,,�,E� 4.:�a -r' .Ai.- 1,.., ,�.+� w�.
t .� ri.'... �"r�; k� �� �Ar -..
hlllf'N � : � .CU''(}ASF
nN�pN Q, 1
CT l
�r Y: LA ULNTAi �Y a "�$ <' ; r1u�i t. R x� III �;.` •,
y �r F
GOLF &eq
J
1 # ml nwo „a P 1 Ay I
PENN/5 RESORTS CLyRHGGl5E(� "� r C OI�ENSE
b I I I Y U `., "jfid SSA I I PAINTED COVE
1 - 7 DAY CREEK DR • • Af7i1-.t{•�a.
= 4 ,� GrtuyA• v p,-'1 p'P�i1 I�'r] RIVER ROCK RD - !Ir t ♦ K4NGS '-- .. V
. i n x+l 4rtrE °Awu yrqq +asna 0 tI NtNFQa:,� aaoa pr fz Z�vj,I ,g I.
- � �1r '^e--�_ - As�♦;HGA� ...19 .-�5 - -Sls 9 "+/--R �.. sn.
AVFOCI $ /VE I I z
:' $
' MIR � �.�`��T' tSPr
�� �. rR.. — — $,..... �i,. L..—�,IP .p — ♦AE �•L:P+�,S n.:''.'iZ..ldj0 eft 7y _ Em
C. p • ■ � �E- 6 y ��r'.
CLUSHO-•. ��I.' r. ' i. •.sr�,. yrr-y+� i �I I� � � }� � —
USE. .' m�+� O I �r ylc ww+YwIiddTcv[cE'
ULTIMO 1 i�j -------
PAIR -IN A
MIO;"NTAMI 6'OURSF. .Q Q INTA .. I 1 .. ..•F .,. r I
- ' LA OQA .s =
U} 1' 1 4z
.A4LE
s GI O ¢ u W Z ¢ q w GE �r y W, _, +�j1il�-� -
rlliilr` � ¢. a < > < 7 rc Q R ice.+'I`r>�N � a r � A OU/NTA rt y
Y t z i a i Z I LY^iS Itir CITRUS COURSE
Z 7 r;.
of r Jt •i r • ° 1 .. f.:•
I ,a TE
t m Oj O 6
; ? *cH
J f PIMA /�� �4 ` 7 ,r. ,n•..�
AY A to = AYp Q
AVEHIQA M rw r * f o r�nw T
z 9 G u APN I 1
VAP Ir3iE' ...
LY -tet'—. ,—`,a��,':v �i:,w-C •.,
CASE M A P
NORTH
CASE Na
Ballroom Expansion Request
SCALE: nts
La Quinta Resort and Club
26
Z
There are no oil wells or other fuel or energy producing resources on the proposed project
site. The project site is located within MRZ-3, a designation for areas containing mineral
deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data.
A. Would the project conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have an adopted energy plan. However, the
City does have a Transportation Demand Management Ordinance in place that focuses on
the conservation of fuel. The Housing Element contains requirements for efficiency in
housing construction and materials, thus reducing energy consumption. The ballroom
development will be required to meet Title 24 energy requirements in its construction. No
other mitigation is required or feasible for this project.
B. Would the project use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient
manner?
Less Than Significant Impact. Natural resources that may be used by this project
include, air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, metals, and other resources
needed for construction. Any landscaping will also be required to comply with the
landscape water conservation ordinance as well as the requirements of the Coachella
Valley Water District for water management.
3.9 RISK OF UPSETAIUMAN HEALTH
Regional Environmental Setting
Recent growth pressure has dramatically increased the City's exposure to hazardous
materials. Such exposure to toxic materials can occur through the air, in drinking water, in
food, in drugs and cosmetics, and in the work place. Although large scale, hazardous
waste generating employment is not yet located within La Quinta, the existence of
chemicals utilized in dry cleaning operations, agricultural operations, restaurant kitchen
cleaning, landscape irrigation and exposure to large scale electrical facilities may pose
significant threats to various sectors of the population. Currently, there are no hazardous
disposal waste sites located in Riverside County, transportation of such materials out of
and through La Quinta takes place.
Local Environmental Setting
In order to comply with AB 2948 -Hazardous Waste Management Plans and Facility Siting
Procedures, the City of La Quinta adopted Ordinance 184 consisting of a Hazardous
Waste Management Plan, The project site has not been used for any type of manufacturing
in the recorded past.
A. Would the project involve a risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals,
or radiation)?
27
•
Less than Significant Impact. There is a minimal risk from cleaning chemicals and
compounds used in the maintenance of the ballroom facilities. No other risks have been
identified or are anticipated.
B. Would the project involve possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Then Significant Impact. Construction and excavation activities will be confined
to the proposed parking lot area where the building will be sited, except for minimal off-
site work as will be necessary for the project. These activities will not interfere with
emergency responses to the resort complex or the surrounding areas nor will it obstruct
emergency evacuation of the area.
C. Would the project involve the creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazards?
No Impact. There are no anticipated health hazards associated with the proposed
ballroom. Any hazards would be less than significant.
D. Would the project involve exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards?
No Impact. There are no existing health hazards on the proposed project site. The
proposed ballroom is not expected to create any health hazards, as long as OSHA and
County Health Department safety regulations are followed by employees. The ballroom
will be required to conform to zoning standards and all applicable health and safety codes
of the City.
E. Would the proposed involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees?
No Impact. The proposed project site is an existing paved parking lot within a developed
resort complex. There is no flammable vegetation near the project site.
3.10 NOISE
Regional Environmental Setting
Noise levels in the City are created by a variety of sources in and near the City. The major
sources include vehicular noise on City streets and Highway 111, and temporary
construction noises. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along the
highway and major arterials.
Local Environmental Setting
The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicular traffic noise from
Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Fernando, the closest paved roads.
28
rN
Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the nighttime
hours. The nearest residential use is located within the resort complex.
A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Any increase in vehicular noise resulting from the
development of the ballroom is anticipated to be insignificant. The existing (1992) noise
levels for the project site range between 50 to 60 dBA. Staff has determined that the
proposed ballroom is most compatible with the Auditorium/Concert Hall land use
category in Table 6.3 of the La Quinta MEA. Table 6.3, Land Use Compatibility for
Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL), indicates that this land use has a normally
acceptable noise range of 55 to 60 dBA, and that above this range is unacceptable. In
order for ballroom to have a less than significant noise impact, the operational noise levels
will not be able to exceed 60 dBA/CNEL. Construction materials and design should take
noise containment and reduction into account for the ballroom.
B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta General Plan regulates excessive noise
and vibration in the City be establishing allowable noise levels for various land uses.
Auditorium and Concert Hall land uses should have a maximum exterior noise level of up
to 60 dBA. If the ambient noise level is higher than this standard, then it will serve as the
standard.
The proposed project will result in short-term impacts associated with construction
activities. During construction, heavy machinery will be capable of generating periodic
peak noise levels.ranging from 70 to 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source. The
Municipal Code regulates construction hours to which the developer must comply.
(Source: La Quinta General Plan)
3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES
Regional Environmental Setting
Law enforcement service are provided to the City through a contract with the Riverside
County Sheriffs Department. The Sheriffs Department extends service to the City from
existing facilities located in the City of Indio. The Department utilizes a planning standard
of 1.5 deputies per 1,000 population to forecast additional public safety personnel
requirements in the City at buildout. Based on this standard, the City is currently
underserved.
Fire protection service is provided to the City by Riverside County Fire Department. The
Fire Department administers two stations in the City; Station #32 on Old Avenue 52, at
Ae. Bermudas, and Station 970, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. The
Fire Department is also responsible for building and business inspections, plan review, and
020
0
construction inspections. Based upon a planning standard of one paid firefighter per 1,000
population, the City is currently underserved. The Fire Department has indicated that a
need exists for a third fire station in the northern part of the City between Washington
Street and Jefferson Street.
Structural fires and fires from other man-made features are the most significant fire threats
in the City. Hillside and brush fires are minimal as the hillside areas are barren and the
scattered brush on the valley floor is too sparse to pose a serious fire threat.
Desert Sands Unified School District and the Coachella Valley Unified School District
serve the City. There is one elementary school, one middle school, and one high school
within the City. These schools are within the Desert Sands Unified School District. The
City is also within the College of the Desert Community College District.
Library services are provided by the Riverside County Library System with a branch
library located in the Village area of the City. The existing facility opened in 1988 and
contains 2,065 square feet of space and approximately 18,000 volumes. The County
unadopted planning standards are 0.5 square feet per capita and 1.2 volumes per capita to
forecast future facility requirements. Utilizing these standards, in 1992, the City was
underserved in space but overserved in terms of volumes.
Health care services are provided in the City through JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio, and
the Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility located in the Plaza La Quinta Shopping Center.
The Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility is a satellite clinic of the Eisenhower Medical
Center, located in Rancho Mirage. The Riverside County Health Department administers a
variety of health programs for area residents and is located in Indio. Paramedic services
are provided by Springs Ambulance Service.
Local Environmental Setting
The nearest fire station to the project is Station #32 located approximately one mile
southeast. Governmental services in La Quinta are provided by City staff at the Civic
Center and by County, State, and federal agency offices in the desert and region.
A. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or
altered governmental services in relation to fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The development of the project will increase the need for
fire protection due to the construction of 37,000 square feet of building area. The
development shall comply with the fire flow and fire safety building standards of the
Riverside County Fire Code to prevent fire hazard on-site and to minimize the need for
fire protection services. Unobstructed fire access will be required. Other code
requirements (such as fire sprinkler systems, construction materials, etc.) will be required.
B. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or
altered government services in relation to police protection?
30
LJ
C
0
Less Than Significant Impact. The Riverside County Sheriffs Department responded
with comments on this project. They had no negative comment and stated that the project
will not significantly impact the Sheriffs Department's ability to provide services. Ample
exterior -and -address lighting is requested by the Department.
C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in relation to school services?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be subject to payment of
school impact fees to mitigate potential impacts on local schools.
D. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in relation to the maintenance of public facilities
including roads.
No Impact. The roadways within the resort complex are privately maintained, thus there
will be no impact upon maintenance of public roads.
E. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in relation to other governmental services?
Less Than Significant Impact. Building, engineering, planning, and inspection services
provided by the City will be partially offset by application fees charged to the developer.
Business license and code enforcement services will be provided by the City of La Quinta.
3.12 UTILITIES
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta is served by the Imperial irrigation District (IID) for electrical
power supply and the Southern California Gas Company (SCG) for natural gas service.
Existing power and gas lines and substations are found throughout the City. IID has four
substations in La Quinta, with electricity generated by a steam plant in El Centro and
Hydroelectric power generated by the All American Canal. General Telephone Exchange
(GTE) provides telephone services for the City. Colony Cablevision services the area for
cable television service.
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides water service to the City. CVWD
obtains its water from underground aquifers and from the Colorado River. CVWD
operates a water system with potable water pumped from 13 wells in the City. The wells
range in depth from 500 to 900 feet. Potable water is stored in five reservoirs located in
the City.
The City's stormwater drainage system is administered by the CVWD, which maintains
and operates a comprehensive system to collect and transport flows through the City. The
31
El
City is served by Waste Management of the Desert for solid waste disposal.
Nonhazardous, mixed municipal solid waste is taken to three landfills within the Coachella
Valley.
Local Environmental Setting
There is an existing storm drainage system in place at the resort complex. Runoff is
directed to the golf course lakes for retention and absorption. All utilities exist at the
project site.
A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations
to power and gas services?
Less Than Significant Impact. Power, sewer, and gas lines has been brought in to the
resort complex. The proposed ballroom facilities will require sewer, water, natural gas,
and electricity. The projected electrical consumption has been calculated to be 1.039 kWH
per day. Natural gas consumption is calculated at 2,434 cubic feet per day. (Source:
Utiligen)
B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration
to communication systems?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom will require service from GTE .or
another purveyor for telephone communication. It is anticipated that an internal
communication system will be installed in the ballroom that is an extension of the existing
system at the resort complex.
C. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations
to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom facility will require water
service. It is not anticipated that the development will result in any significant adverse
impact. on local water resources. Water consumption is calculated at 8,880 gallons per day
for the project. (Source: Utiligen)
D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations
to sewer services or septic tanks?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom will generate sewage which will
have to be transported and treated by CVWD. The developer will be responsible for the
cost of connection to the sewer system Sewage generation is calculated at 7,400 gallons
per day for the project. (Source: Utiligen)
E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration
to storm water drainage?
32
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is current an existing paved parking lot.
There will be no additional pavement as a result of the construction of the ballrooniL There
is an existing storm drainage system within the resort complex. That system will serve this
project.
F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration
to solid waste disposal?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom will require solid waste disposal
service from Waste Management of the Desert or other purveyor. Solid waste may be
transported to the three existing landfills in the Coachella Valley. These landfills are
reaching capacity and may be closed in the near future. Any on-site programs for recycling
will be coordinated with Waste Management. Solid waste generation for this project is
calculated at 259 per day. (Source: La Quinta General Plan; Utiligen)
3.13 AESTHETICS
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta is partially located within a desert valley cove. There are hillsides to
the west and south of the City. Views of the desert and surrounding mountains are visible
on clear days throughout most of the City.
The project site is located in a developed resort complex ion the west central portion of
the City. The proposed ballroom height will not exceed that of the existing buildings in the
complex. Architectural style and exterior colors will match or be compatible with that of
the existing buildings nearby.
A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
No Impact. The project site is located within a resort complex, away from any public
roadway. The proposed ballroom will not be seen from Eisenhower Drive, the closest
public roadway. The new structure will not adversely impact scenic vistas.
B. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom will be required to comply with
architectural and landscaping policies and ordinances of the City. Thus, there should not
be a significant adverse impact upon the aesthetic qualities of the surrounding area.
C. Would the project create light or glare?
Less Than Significant Impact. The anticipated development of the ballroom will include
exterior security lighting which will cumulatively contribute to the existing light and glare
emanating from the resort complex. All lighting fixtures shall be required to comply with
the Dark Sky Ordinance and other current policies of the City concerning lighting issues.
33
r` %M
3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Regional Environmental Setting
The history of the La Quinta area extends back to an era when much of the lower
Coachella Valley was inundated by ancient Lake Cahuilla. Early inhabitants of the
Colorado Desert were people who had migrated across the Bering Strait more than
20,000 years ago. As their migration progressed, they passed through the Colorado Desert
on their gradual way to Central America.
As time past, the Coachella Valley became the home to a band of people that migrated
from the Great Basin. Ethnographically these people are known as the Cahuilla. The
Cahuilla followed a hunting and gathering life style as they lived along the ancient
lakeshore and cove areas in the valley. The archaeological record, as it is known today,
extends back almost 6,000 years.
The Cahuilla were divided into three geographic areas: the Western or Pass Cahuilla
within the Agua Caliente (Paha Springs) area, the Desert Cahuilla (from Pahn Springs east
to the Salton Sea ), and the mountain Cahuilla (south to San Jacinto Peak in the Santa
Rosa Mountains). Traveling across boundaries to exploit seasonal resources was a part of
their annual life cycle and life way. Anthropologist Alfred Kroeber estimated that the
population prior to white contact (2500 individuals) has been reduced to about 750 by
1923.
The most likely locations of prehistoric cultural resources in the La Quinta area are along
the foothills, however, many sites have been found in the open desert floor area. Camp
and village sites are usually located near sources of water, food, and shelter. Temporary
camp sites have been found near game trails, springs, mesquite groves, grass stands,
bedrock outcrops, marshy areas, or along the ancient lake shore line. isolated milling
features, sparse lithic scatters, and isolated pottery scatters have been found almost
anywhere in the City.
In 1540, the first European explorer, Captain Hernando de Alarcon, entered Southern
California at the Yuma crossing, which is located to the southeast of La Quinta.
Approximately 100 years later, Spanish missionaries visited the area. A trail was
established by the Cocomaricopa Indians across the Valley in 1821 as they carried mail
through the San Gorgonio Pass between Tucson and Mission San Gabriel.
White settlement in the Valley did not occur to any degree until the transcontinental
railroads were constructed. The construction of the railroads brought with it the
technology to drill water wells deep enough to sustain settlement in the valley. The
Bradshaw Trail brought in settlers and freight both before and after the construction of the
railroad. The Coachella Valley was the site of the most popular immigration route to the
southwest via the Southern Immigrant Trail. The Bradshaw Trail route passed through the
Valley until 1915 when a graded gravel road was developed for automobile travel.
34
0 -A
The settling of the La Quinta area has been chronicled by the La Quinta historical Society
in several publications and museum exhibits. There'are 13 designated historical structures
and sites recorded on the California Historic Resources Inventory. These resources are
listed in the La Quinta General Plan.
La Quinta experienced rapid growth in the late 1970's which lead to incorporation of the
City in 1982. The City has grown from a population of approximately 5,400 in 1982 to
over 16,000 in 1994. The incorporated boundaries currently include over 31 square miles
of area.
Local Environmental Setting
he proposed project site is locate within a designated historic resources, the La Quinta
Hotel. There are recorded archaeological sites to the west of the project site that are of a
prehistoric and protohistoric date. There are over a dozen recorded prehistoric
archaeological sites within a mile radius of the project site.
A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources?
Less Than Significant Impact. No significant paleontological resources have been
found on the hotel property or the near vicinity of the resort. The project site is on ground
that is higher than the highest stand of ancient Lake Cahuilla, thus it is not anticipated that
paleontological resources will be found in the project site.
B. Would the project disturb archaeological resources?
Less than Significant Impact. There are several archaeological resources within a one
mile radius of the project site. Both insignificant and significant sites have been recorded.
Prior to any excavation of the underground parking garage, a qualified, City -approved
archaeological monitor shall be enlisted to perform monitoring of all excavation and
trenching activities for the project. It is possible that subsurface cultural deposits exist at
the project site given the close proximity of known archaeological sites. The requirement
for such monitoring shall be made a condition of approval for the proposed project.
C. Would the project affect historical resources?
Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta Hotel is a designated local historic site.
The hotel has also been determined to be eligible for listing on the National Register of
Historic Places. The proposed ballroom addition will not impact the hotel structure or the
old grounds around the hotel. The architectural design of the ballroom is in keeping with
that of the historic portions of the resort complex. The project was reviewed by the City's
historic Preservation Commission, which forwarded a recommendation to the Planning
Commission for approval of the project as proposed.
35
D. Would the project have the potential to cause a physical change which would
affect unique cultural values?
No Impact. The development of the ballroom will not affect any known ethnic cultural
values.
E. Would the project restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
No Impact. There are no known religious functions or uses or sacred uses on the
proposed project site or adjacent to it.
3.15 RECREATION
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta has an adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan that assesses the
existing resources and facilities and the future needs of the City. The City contains
approximately 28.7 acres of developed parkland for Quimby Act purposes. The 845.0 acre
regional Lake Cahuilla Park is not included in this count. There are also bike and
equestrian pathways and trails within the City and designated pedestrian hiking trails.
A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks
or other recreational facilities?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include the subdivision of land for residential
units, therefore, there are no park fees required of the proposed project.
B. Would the project affect existing recreational opportunities?
No Impact. The anticipated ballroom project will not affect any existing park or
recreation facility. (Source: La Quinta Parks and Recreation Master Plan)
SECTION 4. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The Initial Study for the proposed ballroom addition could have potentially significant
adverse impacts on some of the environmental issues addressed in the checklist. The
potential significance can be lessen to levels below significance if the appropriate
mitigation measures are implemented. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) has been
prepared for this project based upon this environmental assessment.
The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings of significance set
forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines and based on the results of this
environmental assessment:
36
-90
* The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures.
* The proposed project will not have the potential to achieve short term
goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful
implementation of mitigation.
* The proposed project will not have impact which are individually limited
but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity.
* The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will
adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, with the
implementation of mitigation.
SECTION 5: EARLIER ANALYSES
a. Earlier Analyses Used.
Specific Plan. 121-E was approved in 1975 by Riverside County. The project was required
to prepare an EIR (EIR 41). This project proposed an expansion to the hotel complex
with the construction of 637 condominium units, 420 hotel rooms, and 27 -hole golf
course with clubhouse and service facilities on 619+ acres.
In 1982, the Specific Plan was amended to allow and addition of 279 condominium units
and 146 hotel rooms. An environmental assessment was prepared for the revision which
resulted in the adoption of a Negative Declaration.
Five other subsequent amendments for revisions to the specific plan were approved
through 1989, each with a Negative Declaration being certified by the City.
This project was not part of the previous approvals and thus not assessed in associated
environmental assessments. The convention building was not considered prior to this
current request, with the exception of a traffic study prepared for the 1988 revision to add
340 units to the hotel.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed.
Not applicable.
C. Mitigation Measures.
37
Mitigation measures are discussed in this addendum where possible. A Mitigation
Monitoring Plan (MMP) has been prepared for the project that will become a part of the
conditions of approval attached to the project approvals and permits.
38
w
co
CITY OF LA QUINTA
MONITORING PROGRAM FOR CEQA COMPLIANCE
DATE: JUNE 27, 1995 ASSESSORS PARCEL NO.: 631-370-022 (PORTION)
CASE NO: PLOT PLAN 95-555 & SP121-E, REVISED PROJECT STREET ADDRESS: 49-499 EISENHOWER DRIVE
EA/EIR NO: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-304 APPROVAL DATE: JUNE 27, 1995
APPLICANT: GREG BURKHART/KSL
THE FOLLOWING REPRESENTS THE CITY'S MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM IN CONNECTION WITFIi •
THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE ABOVE CASE NUMBER
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.1 LAND USE & PLANNING
Specific Plan 121-E, Revised
(Amendment 3) part of northern
parking lot
OBJECTIVE:
To permit development of
ballroom facility
MEASURE:
Approval of Amendment to SP
Community
Prior to
SP 121-E,
121-E prior to approval of Plot
Development
approval of PP
Zoning
Plan 95-555
Department
95-555
Ordinance
F
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-30
SUMMARY RESPONSIBLE TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR MONITORING CHECKED BY
3.2 POPULATION & HOUSING
OBJECTIVE:
MEASURE:
None required by the City of La
Quinta.
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-30t
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.3 EARTH & GEOLOGY
Drainage and grading impacts.
OBJECTIVE:
To limit impacts to local
topography and geology. To
provide for adequate drainage.
MEASURE:
Comply with Pubic Works
Public Works
Grading and
Approved
Department conditions regarding
Department
construction
drainage and
drainage and grading
Phases
grading plans
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.4 WATER
Landscaping and irrigation
OBJECTIVE:
To conserve local groundwater
supplies and quality. To provide
appropriate landscaping
materials and quality installation.
MEASURE:
Landscaping and irrigation plans
Community
During all
Ordinance 220;
to comply with Ordinance 220.
Development
phases of
CVWD; and
Review by CVWD of landscaping
Department,
construction and
approved plans
and irrigation plans.
Engineering/Public
on-going
Works Department
operations
ah
G)
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.5 AIR QUALITY
Suspended dust particles (PM10)
OBJECTIVE:
To prevent and control
suspended dust particles in the
local environment. To comply
with all air quality standards by
the South Coast Air Quality
Management District.
I
MEASURE:
Submit Fugitive Dust Control
Public Works
During all earth-
Uniform
Plan for approval. Comply with
Department -
disturbing and
Building Code
FDCP.
Grading Inspectors,
construction
Chapter 70;
SCAQMD Inspectors
activities.
SCAQMD; and
Ordinance 219 -
Fugitive Dust
Control; FDCP
A
A
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-30i
SUMMARY RESPONSIBLE TIMING CRITERIA COMPLIANCE DATE
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR MONITORING CHECKED BY
11-6
TRANSPORTATION/
CIRCULATION
Traffic and circulation hazards
OBJECTIVE:
To mitigate traffic and pedestrian
hazards. To provide adequate
roadway improvements to service
the project.
MEASURE:
,
Comply with the Public Works
Department requirements
regarding street dedications,
Public Works
Grading and
Approved
easements, and street
Department
construction
grading and
improvements.
phases
road
improvement
plans
A
N
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
OBJECTIVE:
MEASURE:
None required by the City of La
Quinta
rn
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.8 ENERGY & MINERAL
RESOURCES
OBJECTIVE:
MEASURE:
None required by the City of La
Quinta.
ip
PP 95-555 c}
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-305
SUMMARY
RESPONSIBLE
TIMING CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
DATE
MITIGATION MEASURES
FOR MONITORING
CHECKED BY
V
Ob
00
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-34
3.9 RISK OF UPSETAIUMAN
HEALTH
Food service, utility line
modifications, safety
OBJECTIVE:
To protect the public and
employees from health hazards
and upset.
MEASURE:
Compliance with all require-
Riverside County
Plan Check,
Riverside
ments of the County Health
Health Department;
Construction
County Health
Department and the Building and
Building and Safety
Phases
Department,
Safety Department for the City of
Department
UBC
La Quinta
0
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-30t
SUMMARY
RESPONSIBLE
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
DATE
MITIGATION MEASURES
13.10
FOR MONITORING
CHECKED BY
NOISE
Temporary construction noise;
operational noise.
OBJECTIVE:
To maintain ambient noise level
for project area.
MEASIiRE:
Comply with ambient noise levels
for the project area and comply
Code Enforcement
On-going
La Quinta
with all applicable local, regional,
operations;
General Plan;
and State requirements.
Construction
La Quinta MEA
Phases
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
SCARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES
School impacts
OBJECTIVE:
To offset impacts to local schools.
MEASURE:
Applicant to pay school impact
Building and Safety
Prior to
Desert Sands
fees established by Desert Sands
Department
Issuance of any
Unified School
Unified School District, unless
building
District
exempted by the School District
permits
Board.
0
N
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.12 UTILITIES
Electricity
Natural Gas
Water
Telephone
Sewer
OBJECTIVE:
Coordinate infrastructure
installation in a timely manner.
MEASURE:
Applicant to coordinate with each
Individually affected
Prior to project
Approved utility
utility purveyor prior to grading
utility company.
completion
plans
or construction.
Engineering/Public
Works Department
N
N
PP 95-555
U Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
13.13
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
AESTHETICS
Architectural design, height of
structure.
OBJECTIVE:
To maintain enhanced
architectural design standards.
MEASURE:
Approval of architectural plans
Community
Planning, plan
Approved
by the Planning Commission and
Development
check, and
architectural
Historic Preservation Commission
Department and
construction
plans
is required.
Building and Safety
phases
Department
of
CA)
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIlVIING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Archaeological resources.
OBJECTIVE:
To protect and mitigate any
archaeological resources or sites.
MEASURE:
Monitoring of all excavations and
Community
During all
Appendix K of
trenching for on-site and off-site
Development
grading,
CEQA
improvements. Monitoring to be
i Department and
trenching, and
done by a qualified archaeologist
1 Public Works
excavation
acceptable to the Community
Department
activities
Development Department.
0
N
A
PP 95-555 �t
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-306
SUMMARY
MITIGATION MEASURES
RESPONSIBLE
FOR MONITORING
TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE
CHECKED BY
DATE
3.15 RECREATION
OBJECTIVE:
MEASURE:
I
None required by the City of La
Quinta
r_J
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
SUMMARY
RESPONSIBLE TIMING
CRITERIA
COMPLIANCE DATE
MITIGATION MEASURES
FOR MONITORING
CHECKED BY
n
LJ
As,
OBJECTIVE:
MEASURE:
PP 95-555
La Quinta Hotel EA 95-301
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
Environmental Assessment No. 95-304
Case No.: Plot Plan 95-555 Date: JUNE 20, 1995
SP 121-E, Revised, Amendment #3
Name of Proponent: KSL DEVELOPMENT
Address: 49-499 Eisenhower Drive, La Quinta
Phone: 619-564-4111
Agency Requiring Checklist: CITY OF LA QUINTA
Project Name (if applicable): LA QUINTA HOTEL & GOLF BALLROOM
CITY OF LA QUINTA
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
57
II. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless
Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Land Use and Planning Transportation/Circulation Public Services
Population and Housing Biological Resources Utilities
X Earth Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Aesthetics
HWater Risk of Upset and Human Health Cultural Resources
, Air Quality Noise Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
III. DETERMINATION.
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, there will not be a significant effect in this case because
the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the
project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. '
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least,
1) one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards; and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a " potentially significant impact" or "potential
significant unless mitigated. " AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
Signature
Date
Printed Name and Title: LESLIE J. MOURIQUAND, Associate Planner
For: THE CITY OF LA QUINTA
58
59
Potentially
Potentially
Significant Leaf Than
Significant
Unlem Significant No
Impact
Mitigated WV_ UV -
3.1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project.
a)
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
X
(source #(s):
b)
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project?
X
C)
Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.
impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)?
X
d)
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)?
X
3.2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a)
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections?
X
b)
Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped
area or extension of major infrastructure)?
X
c)
Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing?
X
3.3. EARTH AND GEOLOGY. Would the project result in or.
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a)
Fault rupture?
X
b)
Seismic ground shaking?
X
C)
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
X
d)
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
X
e)
Landslides or mudflows?
X
f)
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading or fill?
X
g)
Subsidence of the land?
X
h)
Expansive soils?
X
i)
Unique geologic or physical features?
X
59
Potentially
Potentially Significant L a Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
3.4. WATER. Would the project result in:
a)
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
X
b)
Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding?
X
C)
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity?
X
d)
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
X
e)
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements?
X
f)
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability?
X
g)
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
X
h)
Impacts to groundwater quality?
X
3.5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any air quality standard to contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violations? X
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? X
C) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate? X
d) Create objectional odors? X
L
3.6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project
result in:
a)
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
b)
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
C)
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses?
d)
Insufficient parking capacity on site or off site?
e)
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
f)
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
g)
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
3.7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project result in
impacts to:
a)
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds?
b)
Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
C)
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
61
•
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
M
X
X
X
M
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal
pool)? X
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X
3.8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? X
3.9. RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH.
Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X
b) Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
C) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? X
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? X
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? X
3.10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? X
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
3.11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? X
Potentially
Potentially
SLgntflcant Less Than
Significant
Unless Significant No
Impact
Mitigated Impact Impact
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal
pool)? X
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X
3.8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? X
3.9. RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH.
Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X
b) Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
C) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? X
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? X
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? X
3.10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? X
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
3.11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? X
3.12. UTILITIES.
Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alternations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas?
b) Communications systems?
C) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks?
e) Storm water drainage?
f) Solid waste disposal?
3.13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
C) Create light or glare?
3.14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources?
b) Disturb archaeological resources?
C) Affect historical resources?
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e) Restrict existing religious of sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
r% -14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No
Impact
X
X
X
Ki
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
Unless
Significant
Impact
Mitigated
Impact
b)
Police protection?
X
C)
Schools?
X
d)
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
e)
Other governmental services?
X
3.12. UTILITIES.
Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alternations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas?
b) Communications systems?
C) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks?
e) Storm water drainage?
f) Solid waste disposal?
3.13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
C) Create light or glare?
3.14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources?
b) Disturb archaeological resources?
C) Affect historical resources?
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
e) Restrict existing religious of sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
r% -14
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No
Impact
X
X
X
Ki
•
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
3.15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks of other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities?
4. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the Potential to degrade the
quality of the environmental, 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? X
X
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals? X
C) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects). X
d) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly? X
EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses 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.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document.
C) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated," 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.
64
RESOLUTION 95-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
AMENDMENT #3 TO SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT #3)
KSL LA QUINTA HOTEL CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Hotel was originally built in 1926; and,
WHEREAS, the County of Riverside approved Specific Plan 121-E/EIR 41 (La
Quinta Cove Golf Club) in 1975, that allowed the expansion of the hotel to include construction of
637 condominium units, 420 hotel rooms, 27 -hole golf course with clubhouse, and related service
facilities on +619 acres; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did adopt Specific Plan 121-E,
Revised, as set forth in City Council Resolution 85-24 on October 5, 1982, allowing the master plan
to be amended to permit an additional 279 condominium units and 146 hotel rooms; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did amend the adopted
Specific Plan in 1988 (Amendment 1) and 1989 (Amendment 2) permitting additional enlargement
and modification to the Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 27th day
of June, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider,the request of the Hotel Association
of Palm Springs to amend the aforementioned specific plan to allow a new 16,000 square foot
ballroom and other associated facilities including a new sub -level parking garage; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did on the 5th day of July,
1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of the Hotel Association of Palm
Springs to amend the aforementioned specific plan to allow a new 16,000 square foot ballroom and
other associated facilities including a new sub -level parking garage, more particularly described as
follows:
A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF
SECTION 36, T5S, R6E, S.B.B.M.
WHEREAS, said Specific Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of
"The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended
(Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Director conducted an Initial Study, and
has determined that the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not have a significant adverse
impact on the environment; and,
PLe occ 157
65
•
Resolution 95 -
WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the
following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation of the specific plan amendment:
That Revised Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment #3, as conditionally approved, is consistent
with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Municipal Zoning
Code.
2. The proposed amendment is necessary to allow for the orderly development of proposed
Revised Specific Plan 121-E.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of La
Quinta, California as follows:
That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Council in
this case.
2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment 95-304, indicating
that the proposed specific plan amendment will not result in any significant environmental
impacts, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration should be filed.
That it does hereby approve of the above-described amendment request subject to approval
of Plot Plan 95-555 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
PASSED APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
City Council held on this 5th day of July, 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RESOCC157
� n
JOHN PEVA, Mayor
City of La Quinta, California
Resolution 95 -
ATTEST:
SAUNDRA L. JUHOLA, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DAWN HONEYWELL, City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
RESOCC 157
67
1]
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SP 121•E, REVISED (AMENDMENT 3)
(LA QUINTA HOTEL BALLROOM)
JULY 5 1995
GENERAL
•
Specific Plan 121-E, Revised (Amendment 3) shall comply with the requirements and standards of the La
Quinta Municipal Code and all other applicable laws in effect at the time of approval of this project unless
otherwise modified by the following conditions. Upon acceptance by the City Council, the City Clerk is
authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against
the properties to which they apply.
2. This specific plan approval shall expire and become void on June 27, 1997, unless extended pursuant to the
City's Zoning Ordinance.
3. This approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable provisions of Plot Plan 95-
555.
4. The total number of single family homesihotel rooms that will be allowed in the Specific Plan area shall be
1,494 (i.e., 775 units, 719 rooms).
CONAPRU.157
W=
•
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -ADOPTED
PLOT PLAN 95-555 (LA QUINTA HOTEL BALLROOM)
JUNE 27, 1995
* Modified by the Planning Commission on 6.27.95
** Added by the Planning Commission on 6.21.95
GENERAL
•
Plot Plan 95.555 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the La Quinta Municipal Code and all
other applicable laws in effect at the time of approval of this project unless otherwise modified by the
following conditions. Upon acceptance by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these
Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which
they apply.
2. This plot plan approval shall expire and become void on June 27, 1996, unless extended automatically
pursuant to the City's Updated Zoning Ordinance.
3. This approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable provisions of Specific Plan
121-E Revised (Amendment #3).
4. The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist immediately upon discovery of any archaeological remains
or artifacts and employ appropriate mitigation measures during project development.
All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.210 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designed to minimize
light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and
approval by the Community Development Department.
6. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the
Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and
mitigation measures of the Environmental Impact Report prepared for Specific Plan 83.002 and Plot Plan
95.555, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building
permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director
demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of The Environmental
Impact Report prepared for Specific Plan 83.002 and Plot Plan 95-555, which must be satisfied prior to the
issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and
submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining
Conditions of Approval and mitigating measures of the Environmental Impact Report prepared for Specific
Plan 83.002 and Plot Plan 95.555. The Community Development Director may require inspections or other
monitoring to assure such compliance.
If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the conditions of approval, a
phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer.
CONAPRVL.154
RC
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 (La auinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved
phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior
to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a subphasing plan is
approved by the City Engineer.
8. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by
this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
Fire Marshal
Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
Community Development Department
Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
Desert Sands Unified School District
Coachella Valley Water District
Imperial Irrigation District
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If
the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior
to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans.
Evidence of permits or clearances from the above jurisdictions shall be presented to the Building Department
at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith.
Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee
program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
10. Site improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" X 36" media. All
plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer and are not approved for construction until they are
signed.
If water and sewer plans are included on the site improvement plans, the plans shall have an additional
signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD
prior to their submittal'for the City Engineer's signature.
11. Prior to issuance of any permit for construction of structures or site improvements approved or required
under this plot plan, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for
applicant's required share of future improvements to be constructed by others (deferred improvements).
CONAPRVL.154
70
0
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 ILa Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
Deferred improvements for this development include:
A. One half of the cost, or $25,000, whichever is less, for design and installation of median
landscaping and irrigation improvements in Eisenhower Street for the full length of the La Quinta
Hotel frontage. The City will credit the applicant for the previous costs incurred by Landmark Land
Company when they prepared landscape plans for the median on Eisenhower Drive a few years ago.
The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the deferred improvements may, at the City's option, be
satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject
to such a program.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
12. Improvement plans for all on- and off-site streets, access gates and parking lots shall be prepared by a
registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta
Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings, and as approved by the City Engineer.
Pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design procedure for a 20 -year life and shall consider soil
strength and anticipated traffic loading, including site and building construction traffic. The minimum
pavement sections shall be as follows:
Residential and Parking Areas
3.0"14.5"
Collector
4.0"15.00"
Secondary Arterial
4.0"16.00"
Primary Arterial
4.5"16.00"
Major Arterial
5.5"16.50"
If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section which will be subjected to traffic, the
partial section shall be designed with the 20 -year design strength.
GRADING
13. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be
planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved
by the Community Development and Public Works Departments.
14. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted. The
report of the investigation ("the soils report") shall be submitted with the grading plan.
15. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of the City
Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit.
CONAPRVl.154 71
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95-555 (La Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as
adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist.
16. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall submit and receive
approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, La Quinta Municipal Code.
In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an
amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit.
17. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant shall provide a separate document bearing the seal and
signature of a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building
pad elevations. The document shall, for each building pad in the development, state the pad elevation
approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data
shall be organized by development phase and lot number and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at
different times.
DRAINAGE
18. All 100 -year storm water run-off shall be retained on-site unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
The tributary drainage area for which the developer is responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent
public streets.
LANDSCAPING
20. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape
and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval
by the City Engineer if landscaping is adjacent to a public street(s). The plans are not approved for
construction until they have been approved and signed by the Community Development Director or City
Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. The plans
shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect.
MAINTENANCE
21. The applicant or applicant's successors in ownership of the property shall ensure perpetual maintenance of
private street and drainage facilities, landscaping, and other improvements required by these conditions.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
22. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction
inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for the
plan checks and permits.
CONAPRA.154
72
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 (La (luinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
FIRE MARSHAL
23. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 4000 gpm for a three hour duration at 20
psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job
site.
24. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6" X 4" X 2'/2") located not less than 25 -
feet or more than 165 -feet from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travel
ways.
25. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant/developer shall furnish one blue line copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and
spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans must be signed by a registered Civil
Engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the
water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department."
26. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to the start of
construction.
27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13 Ordinary Hazard Occupancy, Group I. The post indicator
valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 -feet of a hydrant, and a
minimum of 25 -feet from the building.
28. System plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for review, along with a planjinspection fee. The
approved plans, with Fire Department job card must be at the job site for all inspections.
29. Install a manual pull, smoke detection and voice evacuation fire alarm system as required by the Uniform
Building Code/Riverside County Fire Department and National Fire Protection Association Standards 72.
30. Install Knox Key Lock Boxes, Models 4400, 3200, or 1300, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox
Company. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval of mounting locationiposition and
operating standards. Special forms are available from this office for the ordering of the Key Switch, this
form must be authorized and signed by this office for the correctly coded system to be purchased.
31. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the
Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new
codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve 112) months.
32. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A1OBC in rating. Contact
certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment.
CONAPRVL.154
73
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 ILa Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
UTILITIES
33. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development shall be
installed underground. High-voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are
exempt from this requirement.
34. The applicant shall abandon all unneeded sewer and water service laterals in this development and install
new laterals as required.
35. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to
construction of the surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench
compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer.
allALITY ASSURANCE
36. The applicant shall employ site improvement construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
MISCELLANEOUS
37. The developer shall submit an interim parking plan to the Community Development Department for approval
if work on the expansion request is to occur between the months' of January to April. The plan will identify
the parking areas for employees, guests and workers during on-site construction. The plan shall be approved
by the Community Development Director, the City Engineer, and the Fire Marshal before work begins. Special
consideration shall be made to ensure that the development proposal does not affect the surrounding
residents. Parking on Avenida Fernando should be discouraged, if possible.
38. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid within 24 -hours after review of the case
by City Council. The fee is $1,250 plus $78.00 for processing by Riverside County (checks to be made out
to Riverside County).
39. The developer shall submit to the Director of Community Development their existing Transportation Demand
Management Plan for review to insure compliance with Chapter 9.162 of the Municipal Code. A plan
approved by the South Coast Air Quality Management District will meet this requirement.
40.** Metal gates will be installed on the front of the service dock to screen the facility from view of Avenida
Fernando when the recessed bay is not being used for delivery purposes.
CONAPRVL.154
74
•
•
ATTACHMENTS
Project Boundary
acel
� sQ
loge
` ou�xo
9 _ n
MOUNTAINU ,�alw� Oya
��..., r
-v
a1409HRRIF n " IM
SPECIFIC PLAN OF
LAND USE
r v�
J.i. CAVIO8ON Ae*OCIATgi I MONON ^ IrC�A
CMI lw.ww. tip . *_.
Total Acres= 621.4 acres
Density = 1.8 du/ac. (Total Project)
Units = 1,133.0 (includes Hotel Rooms)
Calle Tampico
CASE M
CASE Nm SPECIFIC PLAN -- PHASING
1975 Approval by County of Riverside
75
NORTH
SCALE: rets
r
a�
>
Avenida Fernando
x
�
VIN 1
0 .
•,,..,
........,,
Wr t a r 1
OnIL a—
�•
'
SPRO-c Pl. an
Is—s
..-... c—
0011
...�
x, Avenue 50
X
ii■
■ >t s
�y
IP'�Q.Y*
•tea
9
-
"
- =-
GNI
A ---.....:
J -'
n
G
�� .
.a�w
� e � ��.. `
i
WRAC i. uww I�r
/�` C4L.�k• la�rl Irclrrrw [IW.4r
ter'
0 ..wl..r...r
�
Y�r,rrarSl rY�
IMOUNTAINe
ff����
,1
Project Boundary
Calle Tampico
CASE M
CASE Nm SPECIFIC PLAN -- PHASING
1975 Approval by County of Riverside
75
NORTH
SCALE: rets
r
a4Q�1(�L�ii�1�14 2
SPECIFIC PLAN OF
LAND USE IM -E
J' 0- OAVIO&QN ,AnnoruATO; wywwwly, GwurAAA,.
C •.•1 ...•"wr• Mwr.• i.wwl. •
Total Acres = 638.2 acres
Density = 2.4 du/ac. (Total Project)
Units = 1,558.0 (includes Hotel Rooms)
Calle Tampico
CASE MAP
CASE No.
Revised Specific Plan 121-E
1982 Approval
76
I
La Quinta Country Club
r
I
H
SCALE: nts
DATE:
CASE NOS.:
• FIDE COPY PH x2
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 27, 1995
ATIF M2911i84 Q3
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, Revised (AMENDMENT 3) AND
PLOT PLAN 95-555
REQUESTS: 1.) CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;
2.) APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW
ELIMINATION OF PART OF THE NORTHERN PARKING LOT
OF THE LA QUINTA RESORT & CLUB; AND
3.) PLOT PLAN APPROVAL TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
37,000 SQ. FT. BUILDING ADDITION, WHICH INCLUDES
A BALLROOM AND SUPPLEMENTAL FACILITIES WITH A
SUBTERRANEAN PARKING GARAGE IN THE R-3 ZONE ON
PART OF A 17.8 ACRE SITE.
LOCATION: 1000 -FEET WEST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF AVENIDA FERNANDO
APPLICANT: GREG BURKHART, CHIEF ENGINEER FOR THE LA QUINTA
RESORT AND CLUB
PROPERTY OWNER: KSL LA QUINTA HOTEL CORPORATION
ARCHITECT: GIN WONG AND ASSOCIATES
GENERAL PLAN: TC (TOURIST COMMERCIAL)
ZONING: R-3 (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS
COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-304 FOR
THE PROPOSED PROJECT. BASED UPON THIS
ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT COULD HAVE AN IMPACT
UPON THE ENVIRONMENT, UNLESS MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE IMPLEMENTED WHICH LESSEN THE
IMPACTS TO AN INSIGNIFICANT LEVEL. THEREFORE, A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN
PREPARED FOR CERTIFICATION.
PCGT.117
77
1. The hotel was designed by Mr. Gordon Kaufman and built in 1926. The design
theme of the hotel is early California Mediterranean because the hotel was
made from natural materials (i.e., adobe brick and clay tiles handcrafted at the
site). The hotel initially consisted of 56 guest Casita units.
2. Specific Plan 121-E/EIR 41 (La Quinta Cove Golf Club) was processed by the
County of Riverside for the Elkee Corporation to enlarge the hotel complex in
the early 1970's. The plan authorized construction of 637 condominium units,
420 hotel rooms (76 rooms existed), 27 -hole golf course with clubhouse, and
service facilities on 619+ acres. The specific plan was approved by the Board
of Supervisors of Riverside County in .1975
3. At the request of Landmark Land Company, the master plan layout was
subsequently amended in 1982 to allow, an addition of 279 condominium units
and 146 hotel rooms. The revised plan was approved to increase project
acreage to 638 + acres and add additional dwelling units and hotel rooms. The
revised plan increased the project to 916 condominium units and 642 hotel
rooms (i.e., 1,558 units). The City of La Quinta accepted the development
plan in 1982 ietrcn). An environmental assessment was prepared for
the 1982 revision, which resulted in the adoption of a Negative Declaration.
4. Tract Map 14496 was processed in 1979 by Landmark Land Company to allow
591 single family condominium units on 122 acres. The subdivided portions
excluded the golf course lots created by Parcel Map 14273. This tract
included all properties west of Eisenhower Drive and was to be built in seven
phases. However, only three phases were built. This area makes up the Santa
Rosa condominium project. The other existing residential areas were remapped
under separate subdivision map applications (i.e., Tracts 21120, 25237, and
23813).
5. In December 1987, Plot Plan 87-387 was approved by the City expanding the
hotel by 342 rooms to 603 rooms. Also added were 69,192 sq. ft. of ancillary
hotel uses (i.e., restaurants, offices, etc.) with 876 -off-street parking spaces.
Five existing structures were removed. A traffic study was also completed
with the project. The Council required the applicant to post funds to insure
that traffic signals would be built on Eisenhower Drive.
6. Plot Plan 88-393 and Specific Plan 121-E (Amendment 1) were approved by
the City in 1988. The approval permitted construction of a new maintenance
facility and overflow employee parking lot west of Avenida Obregon north of
Calle Mazatlan.
PCGT.117
78
7. In May 1989, Plot Plan 88-412 was approved expanding the hotel by 38 rooms
to 641 rooms.
& Landmark Land Company processed a second amendment to the Specific Plan
and Plot Plan 89-421 in 1989. The approvals eliminated one championship
tennis court, a small tennis club building, and several adjacent parking spaces
and replaced them with 77 additional hotel rooms within a 2 -story courtyard -
style building. This site is located west of Avenida Obregon between Avenida
Fernando and Calle Mazatlan. This expansion project was approved but never
built.
9. At this time, the resort -oriented community consists of the 640 -room hotel
with its convention facilities (i.e., 30,000 sq. ft. of exhibit space), restaurants
and office/retail space. The resort also has three 18 -hole Pete Dye golf
courses, 25 swimming pools, 38 spas and a tennis club. Private (gated)
residential housing complexes that were part of SP 121-E (Revised) surround
the site. The following residential summary is provided based on development
in the project for the last ten years:
A. Santa Rosa Cove - 334 residential units (6 lots vacant)
B. The Enclave/Mountain Estates - 91 residential custom lots (59 currently
vacant)
C. Los Estados - 40- residential units
D. Tennis Complex - The number of units approved was 200, but only 48
were built on part of the site. There is still some vacant property left for
expansion of this use.
E. East side of Eisenhower Drive - The number of units approved in concept
was 110. This area is vacant at this time.
Note: The number of residential units has been reduced from 916 to
775 based on subdivision map approvals.
The hotel complex is located approximately 1,000 feet west of Eisenhower Drive
south of Avenida Fernando. Avenida Fernando is a two lane (private) street serving
the northern portion of the La Quinta Resort & Club and other adjacent residential
properties. The existing site is developed with paved parking,for the hotel complex.
At this time, there are 324 parking spaces in this northern -most parking lot. The main
access driveway into the hotel registration is south from Avenida Fernando, off of
Eisenhower Drive.
PCGT.117
79
North: R-1, Existing Single Family Homes/Vacant Properties
South: R-3, Existing Hotel Facilities
East: R-3, Existing Hotel Facilities
West: R-3, Existing Hotel Facilities
The applicant is proposing to eliminate part of the northern -most parking lot servicing
the hotel/restaurants and replace it with a new single level, 37,000 sq. ft. building
(i.e., 18,300+ sq. ft. ballroom and additional supplement facilities) attached to the
two-story portion of the hotel. The parking is to be replaced below the new building
in a subterranean (basement) garage. The sublevel parking lot will accommodate 91
parking spaces. Seventy-six parking spaces will be lost even with the new sublevel
parking area as proposed. The new addition will double the size of the hotel's
convention/ballroom space.
The new expansion will be approximately 50 -feet south of Avenida Fernando. The
ballroom entry is on the east side of the building. Access into the sublevel parking
area will be on the north side of the new ballroom. Service access is also provided
in this area and along the existing service lane to the west of the proposed building.
The new building is rectangular and measures approximately 185 -feet by 240 -feet.
The architectural theme is consistent with the Spanish -style character (1920s Theme
Architecture) of the existing hotel. Parking will be provided on all sides except the
south side of the building which attaches to the existing hotel. A new pedestrian
arcade will be established replacing the existing stamped concrete walkway.
The new single story addition is approximately the same height as the existing
two-story facility. The total height of the building varies because different roof
heights have been provided. The tallest portions of the building occur at the ballroom
(32 -feet) and the theme tower (39 -feet). The renderings suggest that the new
addition will be similar in height to the existing two-story structures to the south.
They are also comparable in overall height to the existing Salon de Fiesta. The Zoning
Code allows buildings to be no higher than 50 -feet in height for leasable areas. This
height excludes architectural projections such as towers: This building is consistent
with these guidelines.
A new landscape design theme has been submitted for this project. The applicants
PCGT.117
80
would like to replace some existing Mexican Fan Palms, in the parking lot, with
Southern Live Oak trees. This change is being proposed because the existing palms
do not provide adequate shade for customers during the summer months. However;
palms will still be used along some portions of the parking lot and next to the new
pedestrian arcade. Southern Live Oaks are used locally, and can be seen at the
Rancho La Quinta Country Club, in their parking lot, or at the Ralph's Shopping
Center, in Palm Desert, on Cook Street. This large tree was depicted in the original
Landmark Land logo.
The site is designated by, the Land Use Element of the General Plan as Tourist
Commercial. This means: "Primarily businesses specifically oriented to the tourist and
resort industry. Destination resort hotels, convention -oriented hotels/motels, eating
and drinking establishments, accessory retail and personal service businesses, and
recreation uses such as golf, tennis and equestrian facilities." The maximum building
height allowed is 3 -stories.
The property is currently Zoned R-3 (General Residential) which allows hotels, resort
hotels, and motel uses in Chapter 9.52 (Item 5) of the Municipal Code. Therefore,
the Zoning Code and General Plan are consistent with this project request.
According to SP 121-E (Revised), the function of this document is to serve as an
implementation device for the long-range development of the "La Quinta Cove Golf
and Tennis Club." The specific plan allowed the transfer of densities to permit
clustered condominium housing and associated recreational uses.
The case was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on June 5, 1995, and all
property owners in the Specific Plan -area plus adjacent landowners were mailed a
copy of the public hearing notice, before the public hearing, as required by the City's
Municipal Code. No written comments were received from the adjacent property
owners.
Staff mailed to all public agencies a copy of the applicant's development plan on May
11, 1995. No negative responses have been received. All agency comments are
on file with staff.
The applicants have contacted the two property, single family, homeowners to the
north of this development request. On June 7, the applicants told staff that both
owners were aware of their expansion plans. Also at that time, the applicants had
PCGT.117
81
stated that they would be meeting with the other existing Homeowners' Associations
in the Specific Plan area to make them aware of their application. Additional
information will be available at the meeting.
Based on a survey, taken in 1992, by the Inland Empire Business Journal, the La
Quinta Hotel was the second largest hotel in the Valley in terms of hotel rooms.
However, in terms of meeting space accommodations, the hotel was ranked 6th. The
following information is provided:
1.
Marriott (P.D.)
985 rooms/51,000 sq.ft.
2.
La Quinta Hotel
640 rooms/30,000 sq.ft.
3.
Stouffers (I.W.)
560 rooms/33,000 sq.ft.
4.
Westin (R.M.)
512 rooms/75,000 sq.ft.
5.
Riviera (P.S.)
480 rooms/50,000 sq.ft.
6.
Marriott (R.M.)
450 rooms/29,700 sq.ft.
7.
Wyndham (P.S.)
410 rooms/26,497 sq.ft.
8.
Doubletree (C.C.)
368 rooms/14,600 sq.ft.
9.
Hyatt (I.W.)
336 rooms/17,000 sq.ft.
10.
Marquis (P.S.)
264 rooms/32,000 sq.ft.
11.
Hilton (P.S.)
260 rooms/15,000 sq.ft.
12:
Ramada (P.S.)
241 rooms/ 7,200 sq.ft.
13.
Ritz-Carlton (R.M.)
240 rooms/11,642 sq.ft.
Note: This information is provided for general purposes only.
KSL did a market survey of this area and other large developments in California and
Arizona this year. They examined ratios between number of rooms and interior
meeting room space. Based on this survey, their hotel came out fifty percent (50%)
lower than other comparable facilities. This new addition would make their facility
in-line with the Scottsdale Princess, Westin La Paloma (Tucson), and other larger
facilities in the Valley. In discussions with KSL personnel, convention facilities have
a great deal to do with large firms coming to a hotel for extended periods. This
marketing edge would be reduced with the new expansion request by the applicant.
The specific plan in 1982 required a supplemental environmental review for all future
discretionary permits. Therefore, staff has prepared an environmental assessment to
analyze the effects of this proposal under current standards and guidelines.
Attached for your review and consideration is the Environmental Checklist
accompanied by staff's explanations for "Yes", "Maybe", and "No" answers. Please
be advised that all recommended mitigation measures will be included as Conditions
PCGT.117
82
of Approval. Based on the completed environmental analysis, staff is recommending
certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project (#teehmmu 1.
The Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the expansion plans by KSL on May
18, 1995. The Commission felt the new addition was compatible with the existing
architecture of the hotel although the adjacent portion of the hotel is not a historical
structure because it was built in the last ten years. Typically, historic buildings are
50 years or older. The final vote of approval was 4-0-1 (Mr. Pallette was absent).
The current parking requirement for this project would be:
1, Hotel (640 rooms) @ 2 spaces/room = 1,280 spaces
2. Restaurants @ 1/50 sq.ft. (public area) = 123 spaces
3. Retail/Ofc. @ 1/250 sq.ft. (lease area) = 120 spaces
Total = 1,523 spaces
Note: Conference areas/ballrooms can be excluded if it is determined that the
facilities are primarily for on-site guests or patrons. Otherwise, the total number of
parking spaces needed would be 2,923. The Off -Street Parking Code does provide
that applicants can provide "shared parking" plans if certain standards are met.
Compact parking spaces have been proposed in this new application request. The
existing Off -Street Parking Code permits compact parking up to 20 percent of the
required total. Based on the applicant's request, no more than 206 spaces could be
compact spaces; provided the spaces are not less than 8'/z -feet by 16 -feet (e.g.,
1,032 X .2 = 206). Generally, the compact spaces will be created by restriping
based on the attached exhibits.
In 1989, during the review of the hotel addition (38 rooms), the City received various
letters of opposition from the Santa Rosa Cove homeowners. One letter summarized
the general concern of the residents:
PCGT.117
"We do not oppose properly controlled growth, and hotels in that total area
apparently find it necessary to expand in order to stay competitive. However,
the La Quinta Hotel should be forced to provide ample parking for both
overnight and special event guests and also its employees. The streets in our
subdivision were not approved by the City to accommodate hotel guests."
"Our home is on Calle Estrella, close to the south side of the La Quinta Hotel,
and even now on weekends there are cars on our street with hotel guest cards
on their dashboards. If this becomes a serious problem, I would propose all
83
such cars be towed away by order of the Santa Rosa Cove Association. The
hotel would be the loser with irate guests, but if they do not provide proper
parking, they would deserve it."
Staff has included this statement to make the Commission aware of this previous
correspondence because we might receive new correspondence from residents in the
immediate area.
Staff has received a few letters of opposition from some homeowners in the specific
plan area. Based on these letters, staff felt that reviewing some transportation
statements from the past twenty years was appropriate. They are as follows:
"The major loop street in the project area will have a 66 -foot right-of-way. The
feeder streets will be 60 feet wide and cul-de-sacs are 50 feet in width. All
streets will be privately maintained by the homeowners' association. The
streets will be developed according to Riverside County standards." (Page 12 -
1975 Specific Plan document)
"The project could generate about 6,000 trips per day; approximately 50%
would be north on Eisenhower; 25 % south on Eisenhower; and 25 % east on
50th Avenue. Assuming 10% of traffic occurs during peak hour, 300 trips will
be generated on Eisenhower north, 150 trips on Eisenhower south, and 150
trips on 50th Avenue east. In all cases, the ultimate route capacities will not
be exceeded due to traffic generated by the project." (Page 111 - 1975 SP
document)
"The Landmark Company Chief Security Officer has provided an estimate of
600 daily two-way trips on Avenida Fernando (a private internal hotel
circulation roadway) and 500 daily trips for the main hotel entrance. During
1986, gate log records indicate that daily volumes through the private gate to
the west were approximately 275 trips daily. Records thus far in 1987 indicate
a daily volume of approximately 370 trips. In order to be liberal in capacity
calculations, the security office's estimate has been increased to 750 trips for
this study." Additionally, ". .. the expansion project (342 hotel rooms) is
expected to generate an additional 1,400 trips (700 in - 700 out)". (Pages 5
and 7 - 1987 J.F. Davidson Traffic Report)
Based on the above information plus past additions, the following vehicle trip
generation figures are presented:
PCGT.117
84
•
1975 Project
637 units @ 6.2 vt/d
496 rooms @ 4.1 vt/d
Total
1989 Project
916 units @ 6.2 vt/d
718 rooms @ 4.1 vt/d
Total
•
= 3,966 trips per day
= 2,034 trips per day
6,000 trips per day
5,679 trips per day
2,943 trips per day
8,622 trips per day
We can attribute the increase in traffic coming and going from this project to both the
residential units and the hotel. The project's access points on Eisenhower Drive
were developed so traffic would be evenly distributed from this master planned site.
The 1989 traffic figure is an ultimate figure, and it was based on an enlargement of
the property by adding a acres. These traffic figures will be less if the number of
units (or 'rooms) in the project is reduced as part of this application request.
The existing Zoning Code allows developers to submit shared parking programs using
the Urban Land Institute (ULI) standards and local adopted data. In 1987, during
review of the hotel expansion project, a Shared Parking Study was submitted and
approved by the City that allowed the applicant of record, Landmark Land Company,
to have 950 (peak -hour) parking spaces for their expansion request. The study was
prepared by JF Davidson and Associates of Palm Desert ) .
KSL has submitted their parking proposal to the City for their expansion request.
(The document can be found in the spiral bond document in your packet.) The
document was prepared by International Parking Design, Inc. of Sherman Oaks. Their
conclusion is that at 9:00 p.m. the amount of parking needed (peak hour) to hold
patrons and visitors will be 1,032 spaces. Therefore, the minimum number of parking
spaces allowed for the hotel complex would= be 1,032 per Chapter 9.160.035 of the
Municipal Code. This plan meets this requirement.
The ULI Study identified restaurants and hotels as having peak periods of customers
in the evening with midday patronage at 30 to 50 percent. Many factors influence
the demand for parking spaces in a particular location: type and intensity of land use,
availability and design of parking space, parking fees, service levels of transportation,
other than the automobile, and income level of the population. For planning
purposes, it is easier to use the measure of building space units (floor area, for
example) rather than employees, because forecasts of employment are usually not
accurate or available. The ULI Study recommends that floor area include gross
leasable area and exclude space used for lobbies, hallways, elevators, mechanical
equipment, etc. The study states: "In effect, most major, high-quality hotels are self-
contained, multi -use developments containing major restaurants/lounges,
banquet/meeting rooms, and convention facilities in addition to the guest rooms.
PCGT.117
85
Because of this factor, hotel parking demand is complex and subject to substantial
day-to-day variation. Room occupancy changes, as does the use of the additional
facilities. Therefore, the parking demand at a major hotel is best understood in terms
of activity levels and corresponding parking demand of each major component."
In the past, the City has received a few complaints from surrounding residents
concerning outdoor functions at the existing hotel. The complaints seem to have
surfaced when private parties at the Tennis Complex were held. Staff received
complaints that amplified music was used and the party went beyond 11:00 p.m..
They lodged the complaints after the private event. Previously, KSL Management
have spoken with staff about this problem, and have stated that they would
discourage outdoor events that have amplified music. This expansion should help to
eliminate any future need to have outdoor events at the Tennis Complex in the
evening if we permit this expansion request. If the Commission believes the City
should regulate this issue, a specific plan condition should be added that states: "No
amplified music or groups larger than 100' people shall be allowed at the Tennis
Complex after 10:00 p.m.. A Minor Temporary Outdoor Event permit shall be
obtained from City staff if more than 500 people gather outdoors for a public function
on the hotel grounds if admission is being charged. All public concerts (i.e., live
bands, etc.) shall be held in an enclosed building designed to hold large groups of
people."
Condominium Unit�iys. Hotel Rooms: The evolution of the project area to date has
been to reduce the number of condominium units that were originally plotted in 1982
while increasing the number of hotel rooms through purchase of additional land
inside the project boundaries. The reduction in the number of homes can be
attributed to market demands that dictate larger single family homes and other design
changes during the tentative tract map process. Staff presently estimates that 141
homes will probably not be built in the project area, thus reducing the general impact
of the project on the City and immediate area around the specific plan area.
New _i. raffic Signal: In 1987/88, the City discussed having the hotel contribute
toward the installation of a new traffic signal at Avenida Fernando and Eisenhower
Drive and possibly the hotel entrance to the south (Plot Plan 87-387). The signals
were to be installed if traffic levels warranted them. The applicant was obligated to
contribute 50 percent of the cost of the signal(s). The City is currently designing the
signal that will be installed at Avenida Fernando to help traffic movement in this area
based on warrant demands. The Conditions of Approval do not address this issue
because it is covered in 1988 requirements of Plot Plan 87-387. Installation of the
new traffic signal will help traffic movement in this area, and allow safer exiting from
PCGT.117
86
Avenida Fernando onto Eisenhower Drive, a major public street. KSL has been
working with the City's Engineering Department to accommodate this past obligation.
Ballroom: The project is architecturally compatible with the existing buildings of the
hotel complex. The design features match those features used in various areas of the
hotel complex. The location was chosen based on the applicant's need to have the
ballroom facilities close to the existing restaurant facilities. The existing campus -style
design of the hotel does not allow the applicant much flexibility in placing the
structure in another area of the property. Initially, staff felt that another site should
be explored for the ballroom building because the existing Plaza parking (324 spaces)
area is an important parking area for restaurant/convention patrons. However, after
additional review of the proposal with the subterranean parking area, we feel the
addition is appropriate for the site since the minimum number of on-site parking
spaces will be provided based on the developer's shared parking study.
Sublevel Parking Garace: Staff was initially uncomfortable with the planned access
point into the sublevel parking garage. We thought the developer should have the
access point on the east side of the building. We felt that one of the proposed four
two-way access lanes (possibly the third one) should be ramping down to the lower
level since traffic movement to the parking lot usually occurs from the south (from
the registration area) or Avenida Fernando. However, after discussion with the
developer, they stated that they are planning to restructure many of their
underground utilities during construction and this type of change could affect their
needs. They understood that accessing the garage from the west would be difficult,
but they believe traffic movement will be from the east and not from the west. This
was their reason for placing the access point on the north side of the ballroom. They
also pointed out that if the access point for the garage was on the east, it would
impact their proposed drop-off lane. They assume the underground garage will be
used for the hotel's valet service rather than by the self -parking guest.
Parking Durina Construction: Parking could be a major problem during the
construction of this expansion request. The loss of parking in this area during
construction could be severe if work is done between the months of January to April.
Staff would request that the developer submit a temporary parking program that can
identify how they will help traffic movement in and around the hotel should the
expansion request occur in these time frames. However, if work commences and is
completed before January, staff feels comfortable that the applicant can adequately
provide parking areas for their employees and guests (Plot Plan Condition_ 37).
Transnorta_tion Demand Manaa .meat Plan: We have devoted much discussion in this
report to parking and related problems during future construction. Accordingly,
making sure that the Hotel/Resort has a current Transportation Demand Management
Plan (i.e., ride -sharing, etc.) is important to staff. The Municipal Code requires a plan
to be prepared unless the Resort has an approved plan under the South Coast Air
PCGT.117
87
Quality Management District (SCAQMD). To insure compliance, we have provided
Plot Plan Condition, 39.
Shared Parking: A 1992, Urban Land Report indicates that full-service hotels had
occupancy averages of 61 to 62 percent (5 -year average). These percentages can
vary depending on the location of the resort and its relationship to a major highway
or airport, and whether it is in an urban or suburban area. Hotel resorts were higher
in percentage figures than full-service hotels (i.e., 66 to 68 percent). With this in
mind, staff called the City of Cathedral City to ask if they have allowed shared
parking (peak period) for the Doubletree Hotel on Vista Chino Road. Their 1985
study showed that 60 percent occupancy (80% winter occupancy) was an acceptable
figure for hotels that charge more than $104.00/room/night.
Using their study, we project that this project would require 1,076 parking spaces if
the 100% occupancy figure was used (877 at 80% occupancy/675 at 60%
occupancy). The 100% occupancy requirement figure would be consistent with the
number of spaces planned by IPD for this project. Nevertheless, for comparison
information, if the Commission applied an 80% occupancy figure to the City's parking
standards (1,523 parking spaces) the number of parking spaces would be 1,218.
Staff is inclined to accept the parking proposal since the same parking information
contained in this new study is similar to the one reviewed by the City in 1987, during
the expansion of the Hotel to 603 rooms. The American Planning Association "Off -
Street Parking Requirements" Report states that many cities require only one on-site
parking space per hotel room plus additional spaces for other related facilities. The
employees of the hotel are also included, but at a discounted rate (1/3 employees
during each shift, etc.). The City's Code assumes that one parking space is for the
room plus one for the related employee. This parking requirement would probably be
acceptable if this were a stand alone complex, but it is a fully contained complex with
various facilities accessible to its patrons. Although most people do rely on. their
automobiles for day-to-day needs, this complex does have many of its employees
using public transportation (bus system - Sunline) for their needs. The hotel also
encourages its large convention patrons to use shuttle buses to ferry patrons to their
resort for multiple day events both for convenience and because vehicles are
generally not necessary once they arrive for their stay. Additionally, other forms of
transportation are also used and can be provided by hotel personnel. In closing, if the
City's parking standards are too restrictive, the City will be -encouraging a dependence
on automobile travel.
To reaffirm the project, and to insure that we weigh the impacts of the project
equally, staff would like the Commission to consider reducing the number of allowable
units (including hotel rooms) in the project area from 1,635 to 1,494. (A net loss of
141 units) The applicant, under this provision, could have 719 hotel rooms and 775
residential homes that are consistent with the status of the project at this time. Staff
PCBT.117
88
feels this reduction is appropriate because 141 single family homes would generate
874+ vehicle trips/day. This amount of traffic would help mitigate. some project
impacts identified by the 1987 addition plus future development. The residents in the
surrounding area that are part of the project area would be assured that no additional
expansion requests could occur unless they subsequently amended the specific plan
document. Otherwise, any development request within the adopted plan would have
to conform with this amendment and other past provisions of the City Council.
Specific Plan Condition #4 addresses this new provision proposed by staff.
1. The proposed changes would be in conformance with Specific Plan 121-E
(Revised) and the past amendments.
2. Environmental impacts resulting from the subject development will not
adversely affect the immediate or nearby environment.
3. The proposed development is compatible with the existing hotel complex uses
and consistent with the City's R-3 Development Standards.
1. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95- recommending to
the City Council concurrence with the approval of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact according. to the findings.
2. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95- , recommending to
City Council approval of Revised Specific Plan 121-E, (Amendment #3),
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
3. That the Planning Commission adopt Minute Motion 95-_ approving Plot Plan
95-555, a request to develop a new north wing to the existing La Quinta
Resort & Club pursuant to the attached Conditions.
Attachments:
Location p
2. Specific an (1975)
3. peri " Plan (1982)
4. In Study (with Attachments)
5. 8 Parking Study
6. Draft olution
7. DraRes ution
Draft Condi ns
9. Large Exhibit Maps/Booklet (Planning Commission Only)
PCGT.117
a n
ATTACHMENT #4_
OPPOSITION LETTERS
DAVID V.A. FAUVRE
21184 Michaels Drive
Saratoga, California 95070
June 12, 1995
Community Development Department
La Quinta Planning Commission
La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Community Development Representatives:
As property owners in the Enclave- Mountain Estates subdivision in
Santa Rosa Cove we have serious concerns about the proposed addition to the
La Quinta Resort and Club by the Hotel Association of Palm Springs proposed
for the present northern parking lot on Avenida Fernando. Our residence is
located at 77-490 Loma Vista, La Quinta and we are in residence from October -
May.
Our concerns are the following:.
1) increased traffic on Fernando which already has narrow access and is
the primary traffic route for hotel employees as well as home owners and
guests.
2) increased air pollution due to the added traffic.
3) increased noise pollution. We can hear music and noise from the
hotel parties now; this addition will add to the invasiveness of this noise for
residents of Santa Rosa Cove.
4) destruction of the character and ambience of the La Quinta (Hotel)
Resort and Club, the primary historic landmark of the City of La Quinta.
Thank you for addressing these concerns. We see no need for such a
large addition to the resort. The resort was already expanded extensively just a
few years ago and the current convention facilities seem adequate for the size
of the resort. The size of the proposed ballroom and the underground parking
garage seems out of character and unnecessary. The increased traffic
congestion will not enhance living in Santa Rosa Cove and will destroy its
charm and attractiveness.
Surely,
David and Beverly �vre
JUN
��'•~I'�'!�'.1
'+'... �,; 41.:5
As property owners in the Enclave- Mountain Estates subdivision in
Santa Rosa Cove we have serious concerns about the proposed addition to the
La Quinta Resort and Club by the Hotel Association of Palm Springs proposed
for the present northern parking lot on Avenida Fernando. Our residence is
located at 77-490 Loma Vista, La Quinta and we are in residence from October -
May.
Our concerns are the following:.
1) increased traffic on Fernando which already has narrow access and is
the primary traffic route for hotel employees as well as home owners and
guests.
2) increased air pollution due to the added traffic.
3) increased noise pollution. We can hear music and noise from the
hotel parties now; this addition will add to the invasiveness of this noise for
residents of Santa Rosa Cove.
4) destruction of the character and ambience of the La Quinta (Hotel)
Resort and Club, the primary historic landmark of the City of La Quinta.
Thank you for addressing these concerns. We see no need for such a
large addition to the resort. The resort was already expanded extensively just a
few years ago and the current convention facilities seem adequate for the size
of the resort. The size of the proposed ballroom and the underground parking
garage seems out of character and unnecessary. The increased traffic
congestion will not enhance living in Santa Rosa Cove and will destroy its
charm and attractiveness.
Surely,
David and Beverly �vre
•
June 15, 1995
Community Development
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
LUCILLE H. LOEB
P.O. BOX 658
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253
Department
I
JUN 16 19951
00
92253
RE: Specific Plan 121-E and Plot Plan 95-555
Ladies and Gentlemen:
PLAN-VINa DEPJl R i PlEIyT
I live at 77-500 Avenida Fernando in La Quinta. I have lived here
for 40 years. My late husband, Carl, and I started coming to La
Quinta in 1946. We so enjoyed the beauty of the area and
tranquil, small-town atmosphere that in 1952 we purchased our
home:It saddens me to live through the enormous changes which
have taken place on the hotel's property, which increasingly
diminishes the reasons we settled here.
The last time the hotel expanded I was assured that no two-story
hotel rooms would be visible from my home. Today I am distressed
that I believed.what I was told. The privacy of my front lawn has
been destroyed. Hotel guests can peer down on me making my front
lawn virtually unusable. Had I known today the impact, I would
have vehemently protested that expansion.
so I now find it offensive that the hotel, in its continued effort
to expand, has not shown any concern in trying to blend its
project with the surrounding single story homes, but has proposed
a tall building very close to the residential area on Avenida
Fernando. Why can't the height be lower overall?
I am further displeased that with this planned expansion, a
loading dock may be visible from my home. Can't the project be
designed to occupy more of the south side of the parking lot,
reducing the negative impact to the adjacent residental area?
Although I live in an area designated for low density residential,
it seems that I have lost most of its benefits due to the hotels
growth and am now living in a commercial district.
During the past winter's heavy rains there was a considerable
amount of flooding throughout the valley and at the hotel. I fear
that this project may not have an adequate system to dispose of
the water from a subterranean parking garage. Additional pumps
are fine, but where is the water to go? I assume that the present
pipes do not have the capacity to handle a great amount of
additional water. Without a proper drainage system what is to
prevent the flooding from crossing Fernando and affecting the
neighboring residental properties?
I never wanted a parking lot
91
across the street from me, but
accepted this development with the condition of a wall to obscure
the lot. Shortly after the project was completed a portion of the
wall was removed. I object to the removal of any more of the
wall, and insist that the wall be re -installed to hide vehicles
which blight the adjacent residential environment.
On the subject of parking, I grew tired of trucks, vans, RV's and
other vehicles associated with the hotel parking on my property,
so I authorized the installation of S no parking signs for the
street. Now the hotel guests, employees and vendors park on my
property in front of the tennis courts. How will traffic be
directed to the hotel's new parking lots? Who will police Avenida
Fernando to keep people from parking on my property? These are my
concerns on parking after the proposed project is completed. But
what will happen during construction? where will guests,
employees, and construction workers park? Provisions must be made
to accommodate this need, without the benefit of, my property
including providing adequate security for enforcement.
The resulting traffic from all the past development has made the
formerly quiet, private road of Avenida Fernando more like a
freeway. Instead of dying a natural death I am afraid that I will
be run over by a speeding vehicle. we desperately need speed
bumps to slow the traffic down. Future expansion w i 11 only
exacerbate the current problem. How much additional traffic will
be generated by the disbursement of the hotel's parking throughout
its property?
It is distasteful that after nearly a half century of living in La
Quinta it became necessary for me to install gates on my property.
Unfortuantely, hotel guests ignore my signs (which only became
necessary following the last expansion) and invade my property.
What safeguards are being incorporated in this new project to
assure adequate parking on hotel property and supervision of its
guests to respect the privacy of the adjacent residential area?
As a long time resident of the City of La Quinta, I believe its
time for the city to revisit what makes our city so special.
Every city grows and changes - but how we grow determines what we
become. What will we have when multi -story structures block and
obstruct neighbors views, traffic and conjestion threatening our
lives, noise and crime threatening our neighborhoods? La Quinta
won't be so special.
Since, I am back east visiting family I will be unable to attend
the June 27 meeting, but I do want my protests of this project to
be read into the record and hope we can come to an amenable
agreement with the city, and the hotel for an expansion which
takes into consideration the neighboring single family homes.
Just think how you would feel if this development occurred next to
your home.
Sincerely,
Lucille H. Loeb
92
J U N 1 4 1995'
June 12, 1995
Planning Commission
City of La Quints
I would like to register my objection to the proposed building at the La Quinta
Hotel.
I have a home in Santa Rosa Cove. The hotel on many weekends will hold open air
dances and parties with excessively loud music saturating the whole area. They
send their guests on to our property to access the golf course. Some of these people
are inconsiderate and sometimes, obnoxious.
The entire area of La Quinta has enlarged without properly planning streets and
other facilities. Washington Blvd., which serves as the main artery from the 10
Freeway is still only a two lane street, -one lane in each direction. The corner of
Washington and 111 is a constant traffic mess.
I do not understand how the planning commissions in these areas allow large
developments without proper environmental impact studies and proper road access
considerations.
My wife and I strongly oppose this new development.
Richard L. Kasper, M.D.
77 003 Calle Mazatlan
Santa Rosa Cove, La Quinta
Mailing Address: 3 Bordeaux
Newport beach Ca 92660
cc: Santa Rosa Cove HOA
93
ATTACHMENT # 5
LETTERS OF RESPONSE
;'
\j
7r.
RESORT & CLUB
June 27, 1995
Mr. & Mrs. William Puget
P.O. Box 975
La Quinta, California 92253
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Puget,
JN 27 1995 ju
'c
�.w__.�;
Thank you again for your time. I appreciate your continued input
and dialogue regarding our pending expansion.
As a result of our discussions, I would like to summarize the
measures we are taking to address your concerns, some of which are
already in the existing plans and staff reports to the Planning
Commission.
The wall on the north end of our parking lot was reduced in size
as you know due to safety. Although it has increased visibility
to an extent, we all agree that the speed of traffic from Ave.
Obregon and the private community gate west of Ave. Obregon
continues to be the main problem. Therefore, we plan to install
stop signs and other speed control measures (ie. speed humps, not
bumps) to help control this. The property manager for the Santa
Rosa Cove Homeowners Association and every resident.I have spoken
to are in favor of this. At that time, I am willing to expand the
wall to a reasonable location to screen the view from your home
towards the parking lot. I am confident we can make this work for
everyone.
Greg Burkhart, our Chief Engineer, has further researched your
comments about kitchen exhaust noise. Southland Industries is
consulting us on this issue. Should any recognizable source of
excessive noise or problem arise, we will implement reasonable
measures in efforts to dampen the noise. It is also our
understanding that the new building will absorb some of this as
well.
With regard to large special events at the hotel, I have had many
conversations with our Director of Security, Bill Morrison. It is
has been our practice to utilize our staff as well as hire
additional Riverside County Sheriffs to assist in traffic control
for such events.
During the construction process our security and engineering
departments will be implementing and maintaining security controls
with the various contractors. Should you ever need assistance
beyond their help, I am happy to assist you.
94
49-499 Eisenhower Drive, Post Office Dor 69, La Quinta. California 92253, Tel. 619.564.4111, Fda 619.564.7656
page two
Mr. & Mrs. Puget
June 27, 1995
The Southern Oak shade trees that are planned to be placed along
Ave: Fernando can be viewed at the following locations:
1) Ralphs Grocery on Country Club Drive, across from the
Marriott Desert Springs
2) In the parking lot at Rancho La Quinta Country Club
3). Old Navy Store at Highway 111 and Fred Waring
4) Palm Desert Park (near the -Civic Center, off of Fred Waring)
I know that the above mentioned items are very important to you.
I hope that you are comfortable seeing that we are attempting to
work with you on your primary concerns and that we have taken
measures to remedy these issues.
Please contact me with any questions you may have. I look forward
to seeing you soon.
Sincerely,
Scott Dalecio
President & General Manager
cc: City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
Greg Burkhart - Chief Engineer/LQ Resort
Bill Morrison - Dir. of Security/LQ Resort
I
xl x
RESORT & CLUB
June 25, 1995
Mrs. Lucille H. Loeb
P.O. Box 658
La Quinta, California 92253
Dear Mrs. Loeb,
JUN 2
I am in receipt of your letter to the City of La Quinta Community
Development Department letter dated June 15, 1995 regarding our
proposed expansion. Although you and I have discussed these items
previously, I would like to address and hopefully clarify some of
the items you have addressed.
Regarding our two story buildings southwest of your residence, I
have personally stood at each second story unit ( 6 ) and can not
see anything but your roof line. In fact, guests can not see in
your yard and from half of the units, you can hardly see any of
your residence.
Our current meeting space expansion design does take into
consideration the residents on Avenue Fernando. The building has
.been placed as far south and as close as possible to our existing
structure. We have reduced ceiling heights on the north and south
sides of the building. We also have planned extensive landscaping
with various trees, palms and shrubs throughout.
The loading dock you have addressed has a screen wall with
decorative tile 618" high by 48' long. In addition, the dock Itself
is an additional 18' south with a roof structure over this portion.
Some of our most expensive suites are also in this area, and we
believe we have masked the view well. We are also looking at the
possibility of a gate to also help screen the area when it Is not
in use.
With respect to rain water and drainage, all on sight drainage is
to be taken through the existing storm drain system which is routed
south down Eisenhower to the lake at the Dunes Course. We are not
displacing water to Ave. Fernando, nor will any water be pumped to
Ave. Fernando. Ave. Fernando is approximately 2 1/2 feet above our
existing building's ground floor elevation.
We are not proposing to remove any more of the wall on Ave.
Fernando with the exception of small areas in order to provide
enough planting space for the proposed Southern Oak trees. It is
unsafe, and we are not in favor of replacing any of the wall at the
East end of the parking lot without traffic control measures such
as stop signs and/or speed bumps. Every resident I have spoken to
is in favor of at least stop signs.
96
49-499 Lisenhower Drive. Post 0111ce Box 69, La Quinta, California 92253. Tel. 619.564.41 11. Fax 619.564.7656
page two
Mrs. Lucille H. Loeb
June 25, 1995
This expansion should not increase any substantial incremental
traffic on Ave. Fernando. We attempt to encourage all guest
traffic to enter through the main driveway. Our security
department will as always assist in policing the vehicles who
attempt to park on Ave. Fernando, as they will certainly do during
the construction. I would suggest painting your curb red and
placing a post at your tennis court entrance to assist in this
area. I am sorry that you regret placing gates on your property,
but I know that more than just an occasional hotel guest wanders
on to your property (ie. area children, Santa Rosa Cove residents,
Mountain Estates construction workers). Hopefully this will assist
in curtailing this.
I hope that this helps clarify some or your issues. I am happy to
review any additional items with you. It is important that we are
viewed as a good neighbor. I have been at La Quinta Resort almost
ten years and want to help it grow carefully. Please feel free to
contact me or Bill Morrison, Director of Security, if we may ever
be of assistance.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Scott Dalecio
President & General Manager
cc: City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
97
s •
F
mac;
June 23, 1995
RESORT & CLUB
JUN ^�.
i R
Mr. David V.A. Fauvre 1,__ ,. Z ��
21184 Michaels Drive (ATT �"}rye' r
Saratoga, California 95070 --IAN
,�{1"F,r',;,�fi
Dear Mr. Fauvre,
Thank you for time earlier today. I appreciate you allowing me to
discuss our pending expansion and some of our common issues_ As
we discussed, this expansion is intended to accommodate the needs
of our existing business as well as that caused by our growing
occupancy. Although there will be some additional local catered
functions, most of those type functions occur in periods when we
are not as busy with our existing hotel business. This facility
should not create any additional noise from parties, as it is self
contained with its own indoor pre -function space.
With respect to traffic on Avenida Fernando, we do not plan to
increase our employee number. In fact, it has actually decreased
in the past two years. We continue to work with the South Coast
Air Quality Management District on our rideshare programs to
encourage carpooling and public transportation. In fact, we have
in past years won an award for the best plan for large business in
Riverside County.
I am pleased to hear that you would not be opposed to STOP signs
on Ave. Fernando. Speed of traffic and safety is also a concern
of ours, and we continue to research our options there. Mr. & Mrs.
Puget, who live on Ave. Fernando, are also in favor of STOP signs.
Also, we do not have any Hotel signage on the corner of Eisenhower
and Ave. Fernando in an effort to deter guests from entering there.
We prefer our guest traffic to enter through our main driveway.
I would be happy to share our renderings with you. I believe that
our design firm has done an excellent job of maintaining the
architectural style and feel of our property. The proposed name
for the room is "Salon de Flores", meaning room of flowers. We
plan to feature unique floral artwork in the room highlighting some
of our indigenous flora.
Thank you again. Please call with any questions you may have.
Sincer ly,
Scott M. Dalecio
President & General Manager
98
49-499 Eisenhower Drive, Post Office Box 69, La Quinta, California 92253, TeL 619.564.411 1, Far 619.564.7656
J(A,UU4A-'-
RESORT & CLUB
June 26, 1995
Mr. Dan Barnett
Packard & Associates
Property Manager, SRC HOA
41-905 Boardwalk, Suite X-3
Palm Desert, California 92211
Dear Dan,
RJI
JUN 271995�`�
'T'hank you for returning my call today. As we discussed, we continue to move forward with our
meeting space expansion plans.
This addition is critical to our future success as a major resort in the Palm Springs area. The
room is self contained with its own indoor reception/pre-function area. This is something we
currently do not have which will help control sound issues from groups.
I was pleased to hear from you that you are in support of stop signs on Avenue Fernando. Speed
of traffic and safety is our main concern. I will keep you updated on our progress.
Dan, please call if I may be of any assistance to you or any of the homeowners.. Thank you again.
Sincerely,
Scott Dalecio
President & General Manager
SD/pw
99
49-499 Eisenhower Drive, Post Office Box 69, La Quinta. California 92253, Tel. 619.564.41 11, Fax 619.564.7656
\l ,
7,
V VV
1:
RESORT & CLUB
June 26, 1995 >WN 7Z77 IV*
Mr. Richard L. Kasper, M.D. WITY OF LA
3 Bordeaux FlWNiNG BE
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Dr. Kasper,
I am in receipt of your letter dated June 12, 1995, which was sent
to the City of La Quinta Planning Commission regarding La Quinta
Resort's proposed expansion. I would like to address your concerns
With our Resort.
The proposed building is completely self contained with its own
indoor reception area, restrooms, telephones, storage etc... This
is something we currently do not have which should help control
sound issues from groups. The functions that will be occurring
inside of this building should not create any noise, music etc..
that our surrounding residents will here. It is our preference,
and it is considerably more efficient to hold functions indoors.
It costs less and has less impact on our grounds and the
surrounding areas. Our beautiful outdoor venues are very appealing
to our clients and are the trademark of La Quinta Resort. We do
make every effort to have these functions earlier and are very
aware of the city's noise ordinance.
The one time that you have called me personally in the past, I
addressed the issue immediately. That particular incident as you
remember was caused by our guests exercising in .the center of our
45 acres hotel property in the early morning. We are here to be
a good neighbor and are willing to listen to any concerns you may
have.
I am unclear about your statement regarding sending guests on your
property to access the golf course. I am happy to discuss with you
or Mr. Dan Barnett, Property Manager SRC HOA, further.
Thank you for your time. Please feel free to contact me with any
questions you may have.
Sincer ly,
Scott Dalecio
President & General Manager
cc: Mr. Dan Barnett/SRC HOA
City of La Quinta/Community Development Department
100
49-499 Eisenhower Drive. Post Office Box 69, La Quinta, California 92253, Tel. 619.564.41 11, Fax 619.564.7656
PC REPORT
PH #2
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: June 27,__ 1995
CASE NOS.: SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, Revised (AMENDMENT 3) AND
PLOT PLAN 95-555
REQUESTS: 1.) CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;
2.) APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW
ELIMINATION OF PART OF THE NORTHERN PARKING LOT
OF THE LA QUINTA RESORT & CLUB; AND
3.) PLOT PLAN APPROVAL TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A
37,000 SQ. FT. BUILDING ADDITION, WHICH INCLUDES
A BALLROOM AND SUPPLEMENTAL FACILITIES WITH A
SUBTERRANEAN PARKING GARAGE IN THE R-3 ZONE ON
PART OF A 17.8 ACRE SITE.
LOCATION: 1000 -FEET WEST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF AVENIDA FERNANDO (ATTACHMENT 1)
APPLICANT: GREG BURKHART, CHIEF ENGINEER FOR THE LA QUINTA
RESORT AND CLUB
PROPERTY OWNER: KSL LA QUINTA HOTEL CORPORATION
ARCHITECT: GIN WONG AND ASSOCIATES
GENERAL PLAN: TC (TOURIST COMMERCIAL)
ZONING: R-3 (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS
COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-304 FOR
THE PROPOSED PROJECT. BASED UPON THIS
ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT COULD HAVE AN IMPACT
UPON THE ENVIRONMENT, UNLESS MITIGATION
MEASURES ARE IMPLEMENTED WHICH LESSEN THE
IMPACTS TO AN INSIGNIFICANT LEVEL. THEREFORE, A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN
PREPARED FOR CERTIFICATION.
PCGT.117
•
1. The hotel was designed by Mr. Gordon Kaufman and built in 1926. The design
theme of the hotel is early California Mediterranean because the hotel was
made from natural materials (i.e., adobe brick and clay tiles handcrafted at the
site). The hotel initially consisted of 56 guest Casita units.
2. Specific Plan 121-E/EIR 41 (La Quinta Cove Golf Club) was processed by the
County of Riverside for the Elkee Corporation to enlarge the hotel complex in
the early 1970's. The plan authorized construction of 637 condominium units,
420 hotel rooms (76 rooms existed), 27 -hole golf course with clubhouse, and
service facilities on 619 + acres. The specific plan was approved by the Board
of Supervisors of Riverside County in 1975 (Attachment 2).
3. At the request of Landmark Land Company, the master plan layout was
subsequently amended in 1982 to allow an addition of 279 condominium units
and 146 hotel rooms. The revised plan was approved to increase project
acreage to 638+ acres and add additional dwelling units and hotel rooms. The
revised plan increased the project to 916 condominium units and 642 hotel
rooms (i.e., 1,558 units). The City of La Quinta accepted the development
plan in 1982 (Attachment 3). An environmental assessment was prepared for
the 1982 revision, which resulted in the adoption of a Negative Declaration.
4. Tract Map 14496 was processed in 1979 by Landmark Land Company to allow
591 single family condominium units on 122 acres. The subdivided portions
excluded the golf course lots created by Parcel Map 14273. This tract
included all properties west of Eisenhower Drive and was to be built in seven
phases. However, only three phases were built. This area makes up the Santa
Rosa condominium project. The other existing residential areas were remapped
under separate subdivision map applications (i.e., Tracts 21120, 25237, and
23813).
5. In December 1987, Plot Plan 87-387 was approved by the City expanding the
hotel by 342 rooms to 603 rooms. Also added were 69,192 sq. ft. of ancillary
hotel uses (i.e., restaurants, offices, etc.) with 876 off-street parking spaces.
Five existing structures were removed. A traffic study was also completed
with the project. The Council required the applicant to post funds to insure
that traffic signals would be built on Eisenhower Drive.
6. Plot Plan 88-393 and Specific Plan 121-E (Amendment 1) were approved by
the City in 1988. The approval permitted construction of a new maintenance
facility and overflow employee parking lot west of Avenida Obregon north of
Calle Mazatlan.
PCGT.117
7. In May 1989, Plot Plan 88-412 was approved expanding the hotel by 38 rooms
to 641 rooms.,
8. Landmark Land Company processed a second amendment to the Specific Plan
and Plot Plan 89-421 in 1989. The approvals eliminated one championship
tennis court, a small tennis club building, and several adjacent parking spaces
and replaced them with 77 additional hotel rooms within a 2 -story courtyard -
style building. This site is located west of Avenida Obregon between Avenida
Fernando and Calle Mazatlan. This expansion project was approved but never
built.
9. At this time, the resort -oriented community consists of the--640-room hotel
-with its convention facilities (i.e., 30,000 sq. ft. of exhibit space), restaurants
and office/retail space. The resort also has three 18 -hole Pete Dye golf
courses, 25 swimming pools, 38 spas and a tennis club. Private (gated)
residential housing complexes that were part of -SP 121-E (Revised) surround
the site. The following residential summary is provided based on development
in the project for the last ten years:
A. Santa Rosa Cove - 334 residential units (6 lots vacant)
B. The Enclave/Mountain Estates - 91 residential custom lots (59 currently
vacant)
C. Los Estados - 40 residential units
D. Tennis Complex - The number of units approved was 200, but only 48
were built on part of the site. There is still some vacant property left for
expansion of this use.
E. East side of Eisenhower Drive - The number of units approved in concept
was 110. This area is vacant at this time.
Note: The number of residential units has been reduced from 916'to
775 based on subdivision map approvals.
The hotel complex is located approximately 1,000 feet west of Eisenhower Drive
south of Avenida Fernando. Avenida Fernando is a two lane (private) street serving
the northern portion of the La Quinta Resort & Club and other adjacent residential
properties. The existing site is developed with paved parking for the hotel complex.
At this time, there are 324 parking spaces in this northern -most parking lot. The main
access driveway into the hotel registration is south from Avenida Fernando, off of
Eisenhower Drive.
PCGT.117
North: R-1,
Existing Single Family Homes/Vacant Properties
South: R-3,
Existing Hotel Facilities
East: R-3,
Existing Hotel Facilities
West: R-3,
Existing Hotel Facilities
The applicant is proposing to eliminate part of the northern -most parking lot servicing
Pe hoteI/restaurants and replace it with a new single level, 37,000 sq. ft. building
18.300 + sq. ft. ballroom and additional supplement facilities) attached to the
two-story portion of the hotel. The parking is to be replaced below the new building
in a subterranean (basement) garage. The sublevel parking lot will accommodate 91
parking spaces. Seventy-six parking spaces will be lost even with the new sublevel
parking area, as proposed. The new addition will double the size of the hotel's
convention/ballroom space.
The new expansion will be approximately 50 -feet south of Avenida Fernando. The
ballroom entry is on the east side of the building. Access into the sublevel parking
area will be on the north side of the new ballroom. Service access is also provided
in this area and along the existing service lane to the west of the proposed building.
The new building is rectangular and measures approximately 185 -feet by 240 -feet.
The architectural theme is consistent with the Spanish -style character (1920s Theme
Architecture) of the existing hotel. Parking will be provided on all sides except the
south side of,the building which attaches to the existing hotel. A new pedestrian
arcade will be established replacing the existing stamped concrete walkway.
The new single story addition is approximately the same height as the existing
two-story facility. The total height of the building varies because different roof
heights have been provided. The tallest portions of the building occur at the ballroom
(32 -feet) and the theme tower (39 -feet). The renderings suggest that the new
addition will be similar in height to the existing two-story structures to the south.
They are also comparable in overall height to the existing Salon de Fiesta. The Zoning
Code allows buildings to be no higher than 50 -feet in height for leasable areas. This
height excludes architectural projections such as towers. This building is consistent
with these guidelines.
A new landscape design theme has been submitted for this project. The applicants
PCGT.117
would like to replace some existing Mexican Fan Palms, in the parking lot, with
Southern Live Oak trees. This change is being proposed because the existing palms
do not provide adequate shade for customers during the summer months. However,
palms will still be used along some portions of the parking lot and next to the new
pedestrian arcade. Southern Live Oaks are used locally, and can be seen at the
Rancho La Quinta Country Club, in their parking lot, or at the Ralph's Shopping
Center, in Palm Desert, on Cook Street. This large tree was depicted in the original
Landmark Land logo.
The site is designated by the Land Use Element of the General Plan as Tourist
Commercial. This means: "Primarily businesses specifically oriented to the tourist and
resort industry. Destination resort hotels, convention -oriented hotels/motels, eating
and drinking establishments, accessory retail and personal service businesses, and
recreation uses such as golf, tennis and equestrian facilities." The maximum building
height allowed is 3 -stories.
The property is currently Zoned R-3 (General Residential) which allows hotels, resort
hotels, and motel uses in Chapter 9.52 (Item 5) of the Municipal Code. Therefore,
the Zoning Code and General Plan are consistent with this project request.
According to SP 121-E (Revised), the function of this document is to serve as an
implementation device for the long-range development of the "La Quinta Cove Golf
and Tennis Club." The specific plan allowed the transfer of densities to permit
clustered condominium housing and associated recreational uses.
The case was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on June 5, 1995, and all
property owners in the Specific Plan area plus adjacent landowners were mailed a
copy of the public hearing notice, before the public hearing, as required by the City's
Municipal Code. No written comments were received from the adjacent property
owners.
Staff mailed to all public agencies a copy of the applicant's development plan on May
11, 1995. No negative responses have been received. All agency comments are
on file with staff.
The applicants have contacted the two property, single family, homeowners to the
north of this development request. On June 7, the applicants told staff that both
owners were aware of their expansion plans. Also at that time, the applicants had
PCGT.117
stated that they would be meeting with the other existing Homeowners' Associations
in the Specific Plan area to make them aware of their application. Additional
information will be available at the meeting.
Based on a survey, taken in 1992, by the Inland Empire Business Journal, the La
Quinta Hotel was the second largest hotel in the Valley in terms of hotel rooms.
However, in terms of meeting space accommodations, the hotel was ranked 6th. The
following information is provided:
1.
Marriott (P.D.)
985 rooms/51,000 sq.ft.
2.
La Quinta Hotel
640 rooms/30,000 sq.ft.
3.
Stouffers (I.W.)
560 rooms/33,000 sq.ft.
4.
Westin (R.M.)
512 rooms/75,000 sq.ft.
5.
Riviera (P.S.)
480 rooms/50,000 sq.ft.
6.
Marriott (R.M.)
450 rooms/29,700 sq.ft.
7.
Wyndham (P.S.)
410 rooms/26,497 sq.ft.
8.
Doubletree (C.C.)
368 rooms/14,600 sq.ft.
9.
Hyatt (I.W.)
336 rooms/17,000 sq.ft.
10.
Marquis (P.S.)
264 rooms/32,000 sq.ft.
11.
Hilton (P.S.)
260 rooms/15,000 sq.ft.
12.
Ramada (P.S.)
241 rooms/ 7,200 sq.ft.
13.
Ritz-Carlton (R.M.) 240 rooms/11,642 sq.ft.
Note: This information is provided for general purposes only.
KSL did a market survey of this area and other large developments in California and
Arizona this year. They examined ratios between number of rooms and interior
meeting room space. Based on this survey, their hotel came out fifty percent (50%)
lower than other comparable facilities. This new addition would make their facility
in-line with the Scottsdale Princess, Westin La Paloma (Tucson), and other larger
facilities in the Valley. In discussions with KSL personnel, convention facilities have
a great deal to do with large firms coming to a hotel for extended periods. This
marketing edge would be reduced with the new expansion request by the applicant.
The specific plan in 1982 required a supplemental environmental review for all future
discretionary permits. Therefore, staff has prepared an environmental assessment to
analyze the effects of this proposal under current standards and guidelines.
Attached for your review and consideration is the Environmental Checklist
accompanied by staff's explanations for "Yes", "Maybe", and "No" answers. Please
be advised that all recommended mitigation measures will be included as Conditions
PCGT.117
of Approval. Based on the completed environmental analysis, staff is recommending
certification of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project (Attachment 4).
The Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the expansion plans by KSL on May
18, 1995. The Commission felt the new addition was compatible with the existing
architecture of the hotel although the adjacent portion of the hotel is not a historical
structure because it was built in the last ten years. Typically, historic buildings are
50 years or older. The final vote of approval was 4-0-1 (Mr. Pallette was absent).
The current parking requirement for this project would be:
1. Hotel (640 rooms) @ 2 spaces/room = 1,280 spaces
2. Restaurants @ 1/50 sq.ft. (public area) = 123 spaces
3. Retail/Ofc. @ 1/250 sq.ft. (lease area) = 120 spaces
Total = 1,523 spaces
Note: Conference areas/ballrooms can be excluded if it is determined that the
facilities are primarily for on-site guests or patrons. Otherwise, the total number of
parking spaces needed would be 2,923. The Off -Street Parking Code does provide
that applicants can provide "shared parking" plans if certain standards are met.
Compact parking spaces have been proposed in this new application request. The
existing Off -Street Parking Code permits compact parking up to 20 percent of the
required total. Based on the applicant's request, no more than 206 spaces could be
compact spaces; provided the spaces are not less than 8Y2 -feet by 16 -feet (e.g.,
1,032 X .2 = 206). Generally, the compact spaces will be created by restriping
based on the attached exhibits.
In 1989, during the review of the hotel addition (38 rooms), the City received various
letters of opposition from the Santa Rosa Cove homeowners. One letter summarized
the general concern of the residents:
"We do not oppose properly controlled growth, and hotels in that total area
apparently find it necessary to expand in order to stay competitive. However,
the La Quinta Hotel should be forced to provide ample parking for both
overnight and special event guests and also its employees. The streets in our
subdivision were not approved by the City to accommodate hotel guests."
"Our home is on Calle Estrella, close to the south side of the La Quinta Hotel,
and even now on weekends there are cars on our street with hotel guest cards
on their dashboards. If this becomes a serious problem, I would propose all
PCGT.117
such cars be towed away by order of the Santa Rosa Cove Association. The
hotel would be the loser with irate guests, but if they do not provide proper
parking, they would deserve it."
Staff has included this statement to make the Commission aware of this previous
correspondence because we might receive new correspondence from residents in the
immediate area.
Staff has received a few letters of opposition from some homeowners in the specific
plan area. Based on these letters, staff felt that reviewing some transportation
statements from the past twenty years was appropriate. They are as follows:
"The major loop street in the project area will have a 66 -foot right-of-way. The
feeder streets will be 60 feet wide and cul-de-sacs are 50 feet in width. All
streets will be privately maintained by the homeowners' association. The
streets will be developed according to Riverside County standards." (Page 12 -
1975 Specific Plan document)
"The project could generate about 6,000 trips per day; approximately 50%
would be north on Eisenhower; 25% south on Eisenhower; and 25% east on
50th Avenue. Assuming 10% of traffic occurs during peak hour, 300 trips will
be generated on Eisenhower north, 150 trips on Eisenhower south, and 150
trips on 50th Avenue east. In all cases, the ultimate route capacities will not
be exceeded due to traffic generated by the project." (Page 111 - 1975 SP
document)
"The Landmark Company Chief Security Officer has provided an estimate of
600 daily two-way trips on Avenida Fernando (a private internal hotel
circulation roadway) and 500 daily trips for the main hotel entrance. During
1986, gate log records indicate that daily volumes through the private gate to
the west were approximately 275 trips daily. Records thus far in 1987 indicate
a daily volume of approximately 370 trips. In order to be liberal in capacity
calculations, the security office's estimate has been increased to 750 trips for
this study." Additionally, ". . . the expansion project (342 hotel rooms) is
expected to generate an additional 1,400 trips (700 in - 700 out)". (Pages 5
and 7 - 1987 J.F. Davidson Traffic Report)
Based on the above information plus past additions, the following vehicle trip
generation figures are presented:
PCGT.117
C]
1975 Project
637 units @ 6.2 vt/d
496 rooms @ 4.1 vt/d
Total
1989 Project
916 units @ 6.2 vt/d
718 rooms @ 4.1 vt/d
Total
•
3,966 trips per day
2,034 trips per day
6,000 trips per day
5,679 trips per day
= 2,943 trips per day
8,622 trips per day
We can attribute the increase in traffic coming and going from this project to both the
residential units and the hotel. The project's access points on Eisenhower Drive
were developed so traffic would be evenly distributed from this master planned site.
The 1989 traffic figure is an ultimate figure, and it was based on an enlargement of
the property by adding a acres. These traffic figures will be less if the number of
units (or rooms) in the project is reduced as part of this application request.
The existing Zoning Code allows developers to submit shared parking programs using
the Urban Land Institute (ULI) standards and local adopted data. In 1987, during
review of the hotel expansion project, a Shared Parking Study was submitted and
approved by the City that allowed the applicant of record, Landmark Land Company,
to have 950 (peak -hour) parking spaces for their expansion request. The study was
prepared by JF Davidson and Associates of Palm Desert (Attachment 5).
KSL has submitted their parking proposal to the City for their expansion request.
(The document can be found in the spiral bond document in your packet.) The
document was prepared by International Parking Design, Inc. of Sherman Oaks. Their
conclusion is that at 9:00 p.m. the amount of parking needed (peak hour) to hold
patrons and visitors will be 1,032 spaces. Therefore, the minimum number of parking
spaces allowed for the hotel complex would be 1,032 per Chapter 9.160.035 of the
Municipal Code. This plan meets this requirement.
The ULI Study identified restaurants and hotels as having peak periods of customers
in the evening with midday patronage at 30 to 50 percent. Many factors influence
the demand for parking spaces in a particular location: type and intensity of land use,
availability and design of parking space, parking fees, service levels of transportation,
other than the automobile, and income level of the population. For planning
purposes, it is easier to use the measure of building space units (floor area, for
example) rather than employees, because forecasts of employment are usually not
accurate or available. The ULI Study recommends that floor area include gross
leasable area and exclude space used for lobbies, hallways, elevators, mechanical
equipment, etc. The study states: "In effect, most major, high-quality hotels are self-
contained, multi -use developments containing major restaurants/lounges,
banquet/meeting rooms, and convention facilities in addition to the guest rooms.
PCGT.117
Because of this factor, hotel parking demand is complex and subject to substantial
day-to-day variation. Room occupancy changes, as does the use of the additional
facilities. Therefore, the parking demand at a major hotel is best understood in terms
of activity levels and corresponding parking demand of each major component."
In the past, the City has received a few complaints from surrounding residents
concerning outdoor functions at the existing hotel. The complaints seem to have
surfaced when private parties at the Tennis Complex were held. Staff received
complaints that amplified music was used and the party went beyond 11:00 p.m..
They lodged the complaints after the private event. Previously, KSL Management
have spoken with staff about this problem, and have stated that they would
discourage outdoor events that have amplified music. This expansion should help to
eliminate any future need to have outdoor events at the Tennis Complex in the
evening if we permit this expansion request. If the Commission believes the .City
should regulate this issue, a specific plan condition should be added that states: "No
amplified music or groups larger than 100 people shall be allowed at the Tennis
Complex after 10:00 p.m.. A Minor Temporary Outdoor Event permit shall be
obtained from City staff if more than 500 people gather outdoors for a public function
on the hotel grounds if admission is being charged. All public concerts (i.e., live
bands, etc.) shall be held in an enclosed building designed to hold large groups of
people."
C nndominium �lnits vs. Ho ,I Rooms: The evolution of the project area to date has
been to reduce the number of condominium units that were originally plotted in 1982
while increasing the number of hotel rooms through purchase of additional land
inside the project boundaries. The reduction in the number of homes can be
attributed to market demands that dictate larger single family homes and other design
changes during the tentative tract map process. Staff presently estimates that 141
homes will probably not be built in the project area, thus reducing the general impact
of the project on the City and immediate area around the specific plan area.
New Traffic Signal: In 1987/88, the City discussed having the hotel contribute
toward the installation of a new traffic signal at Avenida Fernando and Eisenhower
Drive and possibly the hotel entrance to the south (Plot Plan 87-387). The signals
were to be installed if traffic levels warranted them. The applicant was obligated to
contribute 50 percent of the cost of the signal(s). The City is currently designing the
signal that will be installed at Avenida Fernando to help traffic movement in this area
based on warrant demands. The Conditions of Approval do not address this issue
because it is covered in 1988 requirements of Plot Plan 87-387. Installation of the
new traffic signal will help traffic movement in this area, and allow safer exiting from
PCGT.117
Avenida Fernando onto Eisenhower Drive, a major public street. KSL has been
working with the City's Engineering Department to accommodate this past obligation.
Ballroom: The project is architecturally compatible with the existing buildings of the
hotel complex. The design features match those features used in various areas of the
hotel complex. The location was chosen based on the applicant's need to have the
ballroom facilities close to the existing restaurant facilities. The existing campus -style
design of the hotel does not allow the applicant much flexibility in placing the
structure in another area of the property. Initially, staff felt that another site should
be explored for the ballroom building because the existing Plaza parking (324 spaces)
area is an important parking area for restaurant/convention patrons. However, after
additional review of the proposal with the subterranean parking area, we feel the
addition is appropriate for the site since the minimum number of on-site parking
spaces will be provided based on the developer's shared parking study.
Subl -v .I P rkingGafaae: Staff was initially uncomfortable with the planned access
point into the sublevel parking garage. We thought the developer should have the
access point on the east side of the building. We felt that one of the proposed four
two-way access lanes (possibly the third one) should be ramping down to the lower
level since traffic movement to the parking lot usually occurs from the south (from
the registration area) or Avenida Fernando. However, after discussion with the
developer, they stated that they are planning to restructure many of their
underground utilities during construction and this type of change could affect their
needs. They understood that accessing the garage from the west would be difficult,
but they believe traffic movement will be from the east and not from the west. This
was their reason for placing the access point on the north side of the ballroom. They
also pointed out that if the access point for the garage was on the east, it would
-impact their proposed drop-off lane. They assume the underground garage Will be
used for the hotel's valet service rather than by the self -parking guest.
Parkir7g_Qurinc Construction: Parking could be a major problem during the
construction of this expansion request. The loss of parking in this area during
construction could be severe if work is donee between the months of January to April.
Staff would request that the developer submit a temporary parking program that can
identify how they will help traffic movement in and around the hotel should the
expansion request occur in these time frames. However, if work commences and is
completed before January, staff feels comfortable that the applicant can adequately
provide parking areas for their employees and guests (Plot Plan Condition_ 37).
Tran We have devoted much discussion in this
report to parking and related problems during future construction. Accordingly,
making sure that the Hotel/Resort has a current Transportation Demand Management
Plan (i.e., ride -sharing, etc.) is important to staff. The Municipal Code requires a plan
to be prepared unless the Resort has an approved plan under the South Coast Air
PCGT.117
Quality Management District (SCAQMD). To insure compliance, we have provided
Plot Plan Condition 39.
Shaced Parking: A 1992, Urban Land Report indicates that full-service hotels had
occupancy averages of 61 to 62 percent (5 -year average). These percentages can
vary depending on the location of the resort and its relationship to a major highway
or airport, and whether it is in an urban or suburban area. Hotel resorts were higher
in percentage figures than full-service hotels (i.e., 66 to 68 percent). With this in
mind, staff called the City of Cathedral City to ask if they have allowed shared
parking (peak period) for the Doubletree Hotel on Vista Chino Road. Their 1985
study showed that 60 percent occupancy (80% winter occupancy) was an acceptable
figure for hotels that charge more than 5104.00/room/night.
Using their study, we project that this project would require 1,076 parking spaces if
the 100% occupancy figure was used (877 at 80% occupancy/675 at 60%
occupancy). The 100% occupancy requirement figure would be consistent with the
number of spaces planned by IPD for this project. Nevertheless, for comparison
information, if the Commission applied an 80% occupancy figure to the City's parking
standards (1,523 parking spaces) the number of parking spaces would be 1,218.
Staff is inclined to accept the parking proposal since the same parking information
contained in this new study is similar to the one reviewed by the City in 1987, during
the expansion of the Hotel to 603 rooms. The American Planning Association "Off -
Street Parking Requirements" Report states that many cities require only one on-site
parking space per hotel room plus additional spaces for other related facilities. The
employees of the hotel are also included, but at a discounted rate (1/3 employees
during each shift, etc.). The City's Code assumes that one parking space is for the
room plus one for the related employee. This parking requirement would probably be
acceptable if this were a stand alone complex, but it is a fully contained complex with
various facilities accessible to its patrons. Although most people do rely on their
automobiles for day-to-day needs, this complex does have many of its employees
using public transportation (bus system - Sunline) for their needs. The hotel also
encourages its large convention patrons to use shuttle buses to ferry patrons to their
resort for multiple day events both for convenience and because vehicles are
generally not necessary once they arrive for their stay. Additionally, other forms of
transportation are also used and can be provided by hotel personnel. In closing, if the
City's parking standards are too restrictive, the City will be encouraging a dependence
on automobile travel.
To reaffirm the project, and to insure that we weigh the impacts of the project
equally, staff would like the Commission to consider reducing the number of allowable
units (including hotel rooms) in the project area from 1,635 to 1,494. (A net loss of
141 units) The applicant, under this provision, could have 719 hotel rooms and 775
residential homes that are consistent with the status of the project at this time. Staff
PCGT.117
Ll
[-7
feels this reduction is appropriate because 141 single family homes would generate
874+ vehicle trips/day. This amount of traffic would help mitigate some project
impacts identified by the 1987 addition plus future development. The residents in the
surrounding area that are part of the project area would be assured that no additional
expansion requests could occur unless they subsequently amended the specific plan
document. Otherwise, any development request within the adopted plan would have
to conform with this amendment and other past provisions of the City Council.
Specific Plan Condition #4 addresses this new provision proposed by staff.
1. The proposed changes would be in conformance with Specific Plan 121-E
(Revised) and the past amendments.
2. Environmental impacts resulting from the subject development will not
adversely affect the immediate or nearby environment.
3. The proposed development is compatible with the existing hotel complex uses
and consistent with the City's R-3 Development Standards.
1. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95- , recommending to
the City Council concurrence with the approval of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact according to the findings.
2. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 95- , recommending to
City Council approval of Revised Specific Plan 121-E, (Amendment #3),
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
3. That the Planning Commission adopt Minute Motion 95-_ approving Plot Plan
95-555, a request to develop a new north wing to the existing La Quinta
Resort & Club pursuant to the attached Conditions.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Specific Plan (1975)
3. Specific Plan (1982)
4. Initial Study (with Attachments)
5. 1987 Parking Study
6. Draft Resolution
7. Draft Resolution
8. Draft Conditions
9. Large Exhibit Maps/Booklet (Planning Commission Only)Large Exhibit
PCGT.117
IROQUOIS OR Hera
t z+
2S
�rR�_ a OrsL fYRSR
+—
a��_ac�
-0
PLA7A
LA DUItrA
I4R .iQ U
—
SHOPPHIG
LA QUINTA HS
fL£VEN I
CFNTE
(SITE)
40
PN iN
FFFFFF444444
LA QUINTA
`S,O G
J
CAMEO CLE3 PL
CENTER
Y
BAND fL B PL
1
t:-v
PALM GA11 A Ptq---Eq---Eii�il L11
LN
�,::QQO s�SA.I A4W
I ARAPANOE LN
1 ARAPANOE LNG. !�} 1
AWANOF cT ISTI i?I.'A SOLID I
ARAPANOE TER ,f,,,5u1;""".,~ .'---Tq �Yr �C I
5 AAMANOE CIR Oe
---T YAVAPA CT
r rAOul i '•I L�7 � erta ya 9 1 �
OOuinTA Ong 5¢ s O g F IA GµAifANAEA
1 1 b 4
,I
:".\� I•T rIl ° `-, I�Sxs I •�a5 A I sylA VALLw1ETw /
r f t1 L A IG'dii 9
�iS�RNS—y'yMIN4 �oUINTA
r a
`r1177� P,ssEO xA \ _i r 1 'ry, 1 ..X4,5' c r
— f 111"illfl4s~¢ s''_ koij
EFr'�.��Ir._1t";Sf itti��.`
•`1:- ONA 1 �tl ..�yINCyyO / �. 5iy .HOUSE
r rel •.' M-1 • Si EA;ssEKS , r Y- s y".� p 1 - J •+:
/off/ fyi°
RANCHO ''..
DR LA outivrA
lop
�SIIIIII °` _ CQ%�
�lN
9C ,J
I'rk115`\ A �VrA 6 . .' SDT�'i'NJf
• o \ -� ^ 9f'rf"1/' I KPR ��� LAN PMOTEO S1. -'; �i � � G f� E.a+� y .p' '9� t
RA.• . { q• 0.. e 5 SIA 3. `ice. 1,
7jW.A"�^I�-icy r s- �
;-s a� �nf—r �4 Px C Z bLfNFS FI_ FAL
f v, r ��llrtlb ` 7F� tt�n4,E�. nx.COURSE r�'wf I.MDa iip
-LT�. Q R R p /1e"C[E w'!_'J. ,.. _�%'Ny"''iAf �• . uALL14-
yr�1-Viers: s°gr�sa�v' 4Aa `r'q "OaF. SmcEenusH * t rr;'
oI LA OwNrA i - g�:. ..±.R,� i {uiliri Y TT R 11
\ S[,_, t
ST, HOTEL ..L _ 'rl - CI- a ::;.'. .. �' AR R \ 5;'.
mGC1LF 13 ._ ! r st r 1 Iam 3 AWNUf p 115 `. �i
;. •
TENNIS RESORT CLUBH®i)Sfj�A Ir C HS# �.-. [�] '3•
e I O' w LiC sJ41_. I PAINTED COVE COAIP[f.
]DRY CREEK OR '.+1{1/1
�Iy. r>P:�.t�r� 1?S iPES_I . fi .YARdfiTa F"� {'rti�� ] RIVER ROCK RD
i '4 410�D _'r'W'pvjSYiA' IRLAB gr �PLt�+iY�L
1-0, [� ,�•11A�L4t� .r7Fk[]R�;k .::1� t $$
X1`5 r` �" 4�ue r AV {r . ` v t "PE b'k ��; ra a:�r.�t s
T�Nsc.S
r lo° Iz
I{ �G ?s� t8 uaxw ` Q1i94NL'E Y; o
Y
.�rqMairu a •,�r -.. • ; 'ice ,r`.514
Au
1
~ J - /f IL^' ` ❑ AVD • .. I I Yl iD ONTR9AOZ}K VLC
GLUBMW1Sf . 4 \ 1 F- ULTIMCS Y rCl w_,_ _ SRL QR!MA _
LA (atvNrA o, w I I I 17 T
}., 41QUNrAIN ;roURsf a W a � Z A I$ I I I
�4' r < i i z o " ua +nlrA Td ; : I I iw
ilIIIIr f7•• Csi C u W p W ¢ g wpp V1t4R..AAGF Q. t am f5 .L`01Ri i� r , IT
q . a a a > a { 3 LA OUIIVTA `l4 '
a> W iL+"iSS{"l.�.6sfJ .CITRUS COLrItSE
R� ¢.¢ �� a.5.: 2 m i TAM. ��-C�TLR� I.-
" C1 a f r..
$ 7 7 0 R j'f{'{Aro' I J PING�-
R AW K 1 J' 1
III 111111 11
c AVENIDA MON �.A1T S; �E ? AYV �ONOA I'Dr'--;4 )Ay � r!.
wUNVA
CASE MAP
NORTH
CASE No.
Ballroom Expansion Request
La Quinta Resort and Club SCALE : nts
Project Boundary
aoel
�sQ
l°Qe
MOUNTAIN%
Awls C".qk I r
SPECIFIC PLAN OF
LAND LASE
.'��`�, wrNrancena
J.I. OAVI000N ^wSOCI^TEW wMwYa.[yMpwNM
CMN [..r PM- - [�.
Total Acres= 621.4 acres
Density = 1.8 du/ac. (Total Project)
Units = 1,133.0 (includes Hotel Rooms)
.z 4
fr
1 4
WIN.
r
�
r
Avenida Fernando
.......
vas 1
'
w•a.
_
a
.
.ar' w[
Y..i a
r.Rr J-
• r� �.•
WIN
Avenue SO
�lC�''1•�!l
��
-
/
f 1111Mi! i'
'F•
1 �.
�
•,�- '4 yl
- - -
GNI
�—�- /
r
'
-
'
•
- vr_,'
j _- u+.cs ,lc.rwlr na.T
cruw![l
l !
� r
5
.rr•.rcl r•![r
MOUNTAIN%
V
•�
W
Project Boundary
[
A -
Calle Tampico
CASE MAP
CASE No. SPECIFIC PLAN -- PHASING
1975 Approval by County of Riverside
r
NORTH
SCALE: nts
0
,
. ProjeclWoundary
acel �
SPECIFIC PLAN pr'
LAND USE U -&I -E
�� r�rsurryac�i.,
J.f. OAV,O�ON A••i�C1AT�• sY.��.ry.4Kw��
Total Acres = 638.2 acres
Density = 2.4 du/ac. (Total Project)
Units = 1,558.0 (includes Hotel Rooms)
".
}_�
La Quinta Country Club
xt f % Avenue 50
L-1;��,`�� " "'���- I 1►,ill ; �,�'' � �� r'
,".,I �•1: �'`r` �`''i��y,*��.�+ .;ice `:�� I�l��� s � s '�"'�"I's4.-r.�^+Y*�i+�++�{iE��
E r � r • � � o L�. R 1 �r r 4(j � h �{�' __I —���_. rt...� �.
,. 'x'.5,5 111 rwtiy r�l, 4�,L►. I J ��r�..-. -
Yi
>
66.
1 V
Calle Tampico
CASE MAP
CASE Na NORTH
Revised Specific Plan 121-E
1982 Approval SCALE : nts
ATTACHMENTS
-# j
0
NOV 24 '87 11:27 LANDMARK AND
r~ SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS
ATTnCHMENT 5
FOR LA QUIHTA RESvhT HOTEL
P.2/2
The folloving chart lista the variables used in an Urban Land
Institute (ULI) mixed-use shared parking analysis.
SHARED PARKING ESTIMATION - INPUT ASSUMPTIONS
LAND USES SIZES RATIO % AUTO PERS/AUTO X CAPTIVE
Office
7,770
SF GLA
4.00
100
1.20
R/A
Retail
21,150
SF OLA
4.00
100
1.80
75
Restaurant
7,180
SP GSA
22.2
100
2.00
60
Hotel -Rs
597
Rooms
1.00
80
1.40
N/A
Hotel -Conf.
2,053
Seats
0.33
100
2.00
55
Explanatory Notes:
1) Ratio: represents the number of vehicles per 1,000 SF GLA or per one
seat. (As per La Quinta City Ordinance.)
2) X Auto: represents the percent of auto users for a land use (i.e.
versus people walking or taking public transportation); (an per U.L.I.
standards.)
3) Pers/Auto: represents average number of persons per auto as per
ULI standards.
4) % Captive: represents the percentage of persons on -sites who vinit a
particular land use. (As per Landmark's estimate.)
The folloving chart reflects the results
peak parking demand occurs at 9:00 p,m. for 950
HOUR OFFICE RETAIL REST
of the ULI analysis. The
vehicles.
ROOM CONF TOTAL
6:00
AN
1
0
0
597
0
598
7:00
AN
6
2
1
507
0
51.7
8:00
AN
20
4
3
388
122
537
9:00
AN
29
9
6
328
305
677
10:00
AM
31
14
13
269
305
632
11:00
AN
31
18
19
209
305
582
12300
N
28
21
-'32
179
305
564
1100
PM
28
21
-'45
179
305
578
2100
PN
30
21
38
209
305
603
3:00
PH
29
20
38
209
305
601
4100
PH
24_
18
32
269
305
649
" 5i00
PH
1S
'17
45
358
305
739
6:00
PM
7
17
57
418
305
805
7:00
PH
2
19
64
448
305
837 •
8:00
PH
2
18
64
537
305
927
9:00
PH
1
13
64
567
305
P 950*
10:00
PM
1
7
57
597
122
784
11:00
PH
0
3
45
597
O
644
12:00
M
0
0
32
597
0
629
* Peak Demand
1) Shared
Parking Computer
Program.
ULI - The
Urban Land Institute,
Shared
Parking. Washington, D.G.:
ULI - The Urban
Lan 'mlwa u
1983.
Q 1987
r`ITV nF I A 0111NTA
ATTACHMENTS
�Tb c J "'s a
0
* a44aCM9BU4 D
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 95-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
OF AMENDMENT #3 TO SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E,
REVISED
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT #3)
HOTEL ASSOCIATION OF PALM SPRINGS
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Hotel was originally built in 1926; and,
WHEREAS, the County of Riverside approved Specific Plan 121-E/EIR 41 (La
Quinta Cove Golf Club) in 1975, that allowed the expansion of the hotel to include construction of
637 condominium units, 420 hotel rooms, 27 -hole golf course with clubhouse, and related service
faciliites on +619 acres; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did adopt Specific Plan 121-E,
Revised, as set forth in City Council Resolution 85-24 on October 5, 1982, allowing the master plan
to be amended to permit an additional 279 condominium units and 146 hotel rooms; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did amend the adopted
Specific Plan in 1988 (Amendment 1) and 1989 (Amendment 2) permitting additional enlargement
and modificatino to the Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 27th day
of June, 1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of the Hotel Association
of Palm Springs to amend the aforementioned specific plan to allow a new 16,000 square foot
ballroom and other associated facilities including a new sub -level parking garage, more particularly
described as follows:
A PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF
SECTION 36, T5S, R6E, S.B.B.M.
WHEREAS, said Specific Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of
"The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended
(Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Director conducted an Initial Study, and
has determined that the proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not have a significant adverse
impact on the environment; and,
WHEREAS, at said public hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and
RESOPC 149
•
rPlanning Commission Resolution 95-, _
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said lanning Commission did find
the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation of the specific plan amendment:
That Revised Specific Plan 121-E, Amendment #3, as conditionally approved, is consistent
with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan and Municipal Zoning
Code.
2. The proposed amendment is necessary to allow for the orderly development of proposed
Revised Specific Plan 121-E.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City
of La Quinta, California as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case.
2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment 95-304, indicating
that the proposed specific plan amendment will not result in any significant environmental
impacts, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration should be filed.
That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above-described
amendment request subject to approval of Plot Plan 95-555 for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution.
PASSED APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 27th day of June, 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DON ADOLPH, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
RESOPC 149
•
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SP 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT 3)
(LA QUINTA HOTEL BALLROOM)
JUNE 27, 1995
GENERAL
•
Specific Plan 121-E, Revised (Amendment 3) shall comply with the requirements and standards of the La
Quinta Municipal Code and all other applicable laws in effect at the time of approval of this project unless
otherwise modified by the following conditions. Upon acceptance by the City Council, the City Clerk is
authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against
the properties to which they apply.
2. This specific plan approval shall expire and become void on June 27, 1997, unless extended pursuant to the
City's Zoning Ordinance.
This approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable provisions of Plot Plan 95-
555.
4. The to number of single family homeslhotel rooms that will be allowed in the Specific Plan area shall be
1,494 (i.e., 775 units, 719 rooms).
CONAPRVL.157
U
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
PLOT PLAN 95.555 ILA QUINTA HOTEL BALLROOM)
JUNE 27, 1995
GENERAL
Plot Plan 95.555 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the La Quinta Municipal Code and all
other applicable laws in effect at the time of approval of this project unless otherwise modified by the
following conditions. Upon acceptance by the City Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these
Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which
they apply.
2. This plot plan approval shall expire and become void on June 27, 1996, unless extended automatically
pursuant to the City's Updated Zoning Ordinance.
This approval shall be in compliance with all applicable conditions and applicable provisions of Specific Plan
121-E Revised (Amendment #3).
4. The developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist immediately upon discovery of any archaeological remains
or artifacts and employ appropriate mitigation measures during project development.
5. All lighting facilities shall comply with Chapter 9.210 (Outdoor Light Control) and be designed to minimize
light and glare impacts to surrounding property. All lighting to be installed shall be subject to review and
approval by the Community Development Department.
6. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the
Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and
mitigation measures of the Environmental Impact Report prepared for Specific Plan 83.002 and Plot Plan
95.555, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building
permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director
demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of The Environmental
Impact Report prepared for Specific Plan 83.002 and Plot Plan 95-555, which must be satisfied prior to the
issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and
submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining
Conditions of Approval and mitigating measures of the Environmental Impact Report prepared for Specific
Plan 83.002 and Plot Plan 95.555. The Community Development Director may require inspections or other
monitoring to assure such compliance.
If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the conditions of approval, a
phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer.
The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved
phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior
to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a subphasing plan is
approved by the City Engineer.
CONAPRA.154
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 ILa Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
8. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by
this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
Fire Marshal
Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
Community Development Department
Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
Desert Sands Unified School District
Coachella Valley Water District
Imperial Irrigation District
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPOES Permit)
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If
the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior
to obtaining City approvals and signatures on the plans.
Evidence of permits or clearances from the above jurisdictions shall be presented to the Building Department
at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith.
9. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee
program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits.
IMPROVEMENT PIANS
10. Site improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" X 36" media. All
plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer and are not approved for construction until they are
signed.
If water and sewer plans are included on the site improvement plans, the plans shall have an additional
signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD
prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature.
IMPROVEMENTS
11. Prior to issuance of any permit for construction of structures or site improvements approved or required
under this plot plan, the applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for
applicant's required share of future improvements to be constructed by others (deferred improvements).
Deferred improvements for this development include:
A. One half of the cost, or $25,000, whichever is less, for design and installation of median
landscaping and irrigation improvements in Eisenhower Street for the full length of the La Quinta
Hotel frontage.
CONAPRVL.154
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95-555 (La Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the deferred improvements may, at the City's option, be
satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject
to such a program.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
12. Improvement plans for all on- and off-site streets, access gates and parking lots shall be prepared by a
registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta
Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings, and as approved by the City Engineer.
Pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design procedure for a 20 -year life and shall consider soil
strength and anticipated traffic loading, including site and building construction traffic. The minimum
pavement sections shall be as follows:
Residential and Parking Areas
3.0"14.5"
Collector
4.0"15.00"
Secondary Arterial
4.0"16.00"
Primary Arterial
4.5"16.00"
Major Arterial
5.5"16.50"
If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section which will be subjected to traffic, the
partial section shall be designed with the 20 -year design strength.
GRADING
13. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be
planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved
by the Community Development and Public Works Departments.
14. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted. The
report of the investigation ("the soils report") shall be submitted with the grading plan.
15. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of the City
Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit.
The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as
adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist.
16. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the Applicant shall submit and receive
approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, La Quinta Municipal Code.
In accordance with said Chapter, the Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an
amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit.
CONAPRVL.154
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 (La Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
17. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant shall provide a separate document bearing the seal and
signature of a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building
pad elevations. The document shall, for each building pad in the development, state the pad elevation
approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data
shall be organized by development phase and lot number and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at
different times.
DRAINAGE
18. All 100 -year storm water run-off shall be retained on-site unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
The tributary drainage area for which the developer is responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent
public streets.
LANDSCAPING
20. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape
and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval
by the City Engineer if landscaping is adjacent to a public street(s). The plans are not approved for
construction until they have been approved and signed by the Community Development Director or City
Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. The plans
shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect.
MAINTENANCE
21. The applicant or applicant's successors in ownership of the property shall ensure perpetual maintenance of
private street and drainage facilities, landscaping, and other improvements required by these conditions.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
22. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction
inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for the
plan checks and permits.
FIRE MARSHAL
23. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 4000 gpm for a three hour duration at 20
psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job
site.
24. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6" X 4" X Nil located not less than 25 -
feet or more than 165 -feet from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travel
ways.
CONAPRVL.154
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95.555 (La Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
25. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicantideveloper shall furnish one blue line copy of the water
system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and
spacing, and the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans must be signed by a registered Civil
Engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the
water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department."
26. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to the start of
construction.
27. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13 Ordinary Hazard Occupancy, Group I. The post indicator
valve and Fire Department connection shall be located to the front within 50 -feet of a hydrant, and a
minimum of 25 -feet from the building.
28. System plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for review, along with a planlinspection fee. The
approved plans, with Fire Department job card must be at the job site for all inspections.
29. Install a manual pull, smoke detection and voice evacuation fire alarm system as required by the Uniform
Building Code/Riverside County Fire Department and National Fire Protection Association Standards 72.
30. Install Knox Key Lock Boxes, Models 4400, 3200, or 1300, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox
Company. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval of mounting location/position and
operating standards. Special forms are available from this office for the ordering of the Key Switch, this
form must be authorized and signed by this office for the correctly coded system to be purchased.
31. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the
Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. Conditions subject to change with adoption of new
codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve (12) months.
32. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A1OBC in rating. Contact
certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment.
UTILITIES
33. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development shall be
installed underground. High-voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are
exempt from this requirement.
34. The applicant shall abandon all unneeded sewer and water service laterals in this development and install
new laterals as required.
MANU A 54
Conditions of Approval
Plot Plan 95-555 (La Quinta Hotel Ballroom)
June 27, 1995
35. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to
construction of the surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench
compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
36. The applicant shall employ site improvement construction quality -assurance measures which meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
MISCELLANEOUS
37. The developer shall submit an interim parking plan to the Community Development Department for approval
if work on the expansion request is to occur between the months' ofJanuary to April. The plan will identify
the parking areas for employees, guests and workers during on-site construction. The plan shall be approved
by the Community Development Director, the City Engineer, and the Fire Marshal before work begins. Special
consideration shall be made to ensure that the development proposal does not affect the surrounding
residents. Parking on Avenida Fernando should be discouraged, if possible.
38. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid within 24 -hours after review of the case
by City Council. The fee is $1,250 plus $78.00 for processing by Riverside County (checks to be made out
to Riverside County).
39. The developer shall submit to the Director of Community Development their existing Transportation Demand
Management Plan for review to insure compliance with Chapter 9.162 of the Municipal Code. A plan
approved by the South Coast Air Quality Management District will meet this requirement.
CONAPRVL.154
ENV. INFO
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
Environmental Assessment No. 95-304
Case No.: Plot Plan 95-555 Date: JUNE 20, 1995
SP 121-E, Revised, Amendment #3
Name of Proponent: KSL DEVELOPMENT
Address: 49-499 Eisenhower Drive, La Quinta
Phone: 619-564-4111
Agency Requiring Checklist: CITY OF LA QUINTA
Project Name (if applicable): LA QUINTA HOTEL & GOLF BALLROOM
CITY OF LA QUINTA
Community Development Department
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
II. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless
Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Land Use and Planning Transportation/Circulation Public Services
Population and Housing Biological Resources Utilities
X Earth Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Aesthetics
Water Risk of Upset and Human Health Cultural Resources
Air Quality Noise P Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
III. DETERMINATION.
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, there will not be a significant effect in this case because
the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the
project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least,
1) one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards; and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a " potentially significant impact" or "potential
significant unless mitigated. " AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must
analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
Signature
Date
Printed Name and Title: LESLIE J. MOURIQUAND, Associate Planner
For: THE CITY OF LA QUINTA
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
Potentially
Potentially
Significant Less Than
Significant
Unleu Significant No
Impact
Mitigated Impact Impact
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a)
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
X
(source li(s):
b)
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project?
X
C)
Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.
impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)?
X
d)
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)?
X
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a)
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections?
X
b)
Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped
area or extension of major infrastructure)?
X
C)
Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing?
X
EARTH AND GEOLOGY. Would the project result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a)
Fault rupture?
X
b)
Seismic ground shaking?
X
C)
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
X
d)
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
X
e)
Landslides or mudflows?
X
f)
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading or fill?
X
g)
Subsidence of the land?
X
h)
Expansive soils?
X
i)
Unique geologic or physical features?
X
3.4. WATER. Would the project result in:
a)
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Potentially
b)
Potentially
Significant Less Than
Significant
Unless Significant No
C)
Impact
Mitigated Impact Impact
3.4. WATER. Would the project result in:
a)
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
X
b)
Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding?
X
C)
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity?
X
d)
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
X
e)
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements?
X
f)
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability?
X
g)
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
X.
h)
Impacts to groundwater quality?
X
3.5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any air quality standard to contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violations? X
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? X
C) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or
cause any change in climate? X
d) Create objectional odors? X
Potentially
Potentially Significant Lean'Man
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
3.6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project
result
in:
a)
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
X
b)
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g. farm equipment)?
X
C)
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby
uses?
X
d)
Insufficient parking capacity on site or off site?
X
e)
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
X
f)
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
X
g)
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
X
3.7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project result in
impacts to:
a)
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish,
insects, animals, and birds?
X
b)
Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
X
C)
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
X
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal
pool)? X
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X
3.8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? X
3.9. RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH.
Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including; but not limited to: oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X
b) Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
C) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? X
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? X
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? X
3.10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? X
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
3.11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? X
Potentially
Potentially
Significant I= Than
signdtearit
Unless Significant No
Impact
Mitigated Impact Impact
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal
pool)? X
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X
3.8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? X
3.9. RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH.
Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including; but not limited to: oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X
b) Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? X
C) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? X
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? X
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? X
3.10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? X
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
3.11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? X
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
b) Police protection? X
C) Schools? X
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X
e) Other governmental services? X
3.12. UTILITIES.
Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alternations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? X
b) Communications systems? X
C) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? X
d) Sewer or septic tanks? X
e) Storm water drainage? X
f) Solid waste disposal? X
3.13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? X
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? X
C) Create light or glare? X
3.14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? X
b) Disturb archaeological resources? X
C) Affect historical resources? X
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X
e) Restrict existing religious of sacred uses within the
potential impact area? X
3.15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks of other recreational facilities? X
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? X
4. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the Potential to degrade the
quality of the environmental, 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? X
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals? X
C) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects). X
d) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly? X
EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses 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.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document.
C) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated, " 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.
Potentially
Potentially
Significant Leu Than
Significant
Unless Significant No
Impact
Mitigated Impact Impact
3.15. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks of other recreational facilities? X
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? X
4. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the Potential to degrade the
quality of the environmental, 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? X
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals? X
C) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects). X
d) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly? X
EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses 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.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document.
C) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated, " describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier
document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 95-304
Prepared for:
Plot Plan 95-555/SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, REVISED (AMENDMENT 3#)
Greg Burkhart/KSL
La Quinta Resort & Club
La Quinta, California
Prepared by:
Community Development Department
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
June 20, 1995
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Page
1 INTRODUCTION
3
1.1 Project Overview
3
1.2 Purpose of Initial Study
3
1.3 Background of Environmental Review
4
1.4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review
4
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
4
2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting
4
2.2 Physical Characteristics
4
2.3 Operational Characteristics
4
2.4 Objectives
4
2.5 Discretionary Actions
5
2.6 Related Projects
5
3 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
5
3.1 Land Use and Planning
5
3.2 Population and Housing
7
3.3 Earth Resources
8
3.4 Water
10
3.5 Air Quality
13
3.6 Transportation/Circulation
16
3.7 Biological Resources
18
3.8 Energy and Mineral Resources
19
3.9 Risk of Upset/Human Health
20
3.10 Noise
21
3.11 Public Services
22
3.12 Utilities
24
3.13 Aesthetics
26
3.14 Cultural Resources
27
3.15 Recreation
29
4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
29
5 EARLIER ANALYSIS
30
0
s 3
SECTION 1: IISTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The La Quinta Resort and Hotel has submitted an application for plot plan review of a
proposed 37,000 square foot building addition, which includes a 16,000 square foot
ballroom, and supplemental facilities with a subterranean parking garage. The ballroom is
proposed to be constructed in an existing parking lot on the north side of the resort
complex. The building will feature parking underneath in order to accommodate required
parking needsThe assumed density of the proposed ballroom is 12 square feet per seat, or
1,333 seats.
The City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency for the project review, as defined by Section
21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Lead Agency is the public
agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which
may have a significant effect upon the environment. The City of La Quinta, as the Lead
Agency, has the authority to oversee the environmental review and to approve the
proposed development.
1.2 PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY
As part of the environmental review for the ballroom, the City of La Quinta Community
Development Department has prepared this Initial Study. This document provides a basis
for determining the nature and scope of the subsequent environmental review for the
proposed ballroom. The purposes of the initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the
CEQA Guidelines, include the following:
To provide the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to
prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) or a negative declaration for the
ballroom construction;
To enable the applicant or the City of La Quinta to modify the project, mitigating
adverse acts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a
mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact;
To assist the preparation of an EM should one be required, by focusing the
analysis on those issues that will be adversely impacted by the proposed project;
To facilitate environmental review early in the design of the project;
To provide documentation for the findings in a negative declaration that the
project will not have a significant effect on the environment;
To eliminate unnecessary EIR's; and
4
To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project.
1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed project was deemed subject to the environmental review requirements of
CEQA in light of the proposed construction of the ballroom The Environmental Officer
for the Community Development Department prepared this Initial Study and addendum
for review and certification by the Planning Commission for the City of La Quinta.
1.4 SUMMARY OF PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This Initial Study indicates that there is a potential for adverse environmental impacts on
some of the issue areas contained in the Environmental Checklist. Mitigation measures
have been recommended in a Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) which will reduce
potential impacts to insignificant levels. As a result, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project. An EIR will not be necessary.
SECTION 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of La Quinta is a 31.18 square mile municipality located in the southwestern
portion of the Coachella Valley. The City is bounded on the west by the City of Indian
Wells, on the east by the City is bounded on the west by the City of Indio and Riverside
County, on the north by Riverside County, and federal and County lands to the south. The
City of La Quinta was incorporated in 1982.
2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed expansion request will consist of a 37,000 square foot building with
subterranean parking garage below the proposed building. The project site is located in the
Plaza Parking Lot on the north side of the existing hotel and restaurant facilities.
2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
The ballroom will serve large group events such as dances, conventions, private parties,
etc. There will be banquet storage space, general storage space, office space, restrooms,
and a pre -function area.
2.4 OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the proposed ballroom are to accommodate larger groups, increase
revenue with expended facilities, and provide greater flexibility in available facilities.
2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
A discretionary action is an action taken by a government agency (for this project, the
government agency is the City of La Quinta ) that calls for the exercise of judgment in
deciding whether to approve a project. The proposed project will require discretionary
approval from the Planning Commission for the following:
* Approval of a Plot Plan for the project
* Certification of the Environmental Assessment for the project
2.6 RELATED PROJECTS
There are no current projects related to the proposed ballroom project. The project site is,
however, part of Specific Plan 121-E that was approved prior to the City's incorporation,
by the County of Riverside. There have been several plot plan approvals for new buildings
and amendments to the Specific Plan over the last ten years. The proposed project for the
ballroom addition requires that there be an amendment to the Specific Plan to permit the
proposed elimination of a part of the existing parking lot where the new building will be
constructed. This amendment is being processed concurrently with the proposed plot plan.
SECTION 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the development
of the new ballroom addition to the La Quints Resort and Club. CEQA issue areas are
evaluated in this addendum as contained in the initial Study Checklist.
Under each checklist item, the environmental setting is discussed, including a description
of conditions as they presently exist within the City and the areas affected by the proposed
project. Thresholds for significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible
or trustee agencies or by referring to criteria in CEQA (Appendix G).
3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quints is located in the Coachella Valley, in the eastern portion of
Riverside County. The valley is abundant with both plant and animal life. Topographical
relief ranges from -237 feet below meau sea level (msl) to about 2,000 feet above msl. The
valley is surrounded by the San Jacinto Mountains, the Santa Rosa Mountains, the
Orocopia Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountain range. The San Andreas fault
transects the northeastern edge of the valley.
Local Environmental Selling
The proposed project site is located west of Eisenhower Drive and Southwest of Ave.
Fernando, in the southwestern portion of the City of La Quints. The project site is part of
the La Quints Resort and Club complex that was first constructed in the 1920's. The hotel
E
6
is designated as a historical structure in the City's General Plan. The exact project site is
within an existing parking lot that is adjacent to the hotel and restaurants.
A. ' Would the project conflict with the general plan designation or zoning?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is within the R-3 zone
classification that permits hotels and accessory conference facilities. The General Plan land
use designation is that of Tourist Commercial (TC). The land use designation and zoning
designation are compatible with each other. Specific Plan 121-E governs that development
of the hotel complex. In order to eliminate a portion of the existing parking lot where the
ballroom will be built, it is necessary to amend the Specific Plan.
B. Would the project conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
No Impact. The City of La Quinta has jurisdiction over this project approval. The
primary environmental plans and policies related to development of the ballroom are
identified in the La Quinta General Plan, the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment,
and Specific Plan 121-E.
The project site is within Redevelopment Area # 1 which includes the Cove area and most
of the southern portion of the City. The redevelopment plan for the area relies upon the
General Plan to indicate the location and extent of permitted development. As a result, the
development of the convention building is also consistent with the adopted
Redevelopment Plan. The development proposed will not exceed the development
standards contained in the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
C. Would the project affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to
soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
No Impact. No agricultural lands are located on the site. No impact on agricultural
resources or operations will result from the proposed project. (Sources: La Quinta
General Plan; Zoning Ordinance; Site Survey)
D. Would the project disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income minority community)?
No Impact. The project site will be developed with a 37,000 square foot building and
subterranean parking garage as permitted by the proposed amendment to Specific Plan
121-E and an approved Plot Plan for architectural review. The future ballroom will not
affect the physical arrangement of existing neighborhoods or other types of development
in the La Quinta Cove area of La Quinta. (Sources: Site Survey; Proposed Site Plan)
7
3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Regional Environmental Setting
Between 1980 and 1990, the population of La Quinta expanded 125%, as reported by the
U.S. Census, making it the second fastest growing city in the Coachella Valley. The
number of City residents blossomed from 4,992 to 11,215. La Quinta's share of the entire
valley population increased from 3.7%, in 1980, to 5.1%, in 1990. These figures are based
upon information provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, the State Department of Finance,
and the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG).
The City's population as of January, 1994, is estimated by the State Department of
Finance, to be 16,634 persons. This is an increase of 208% in the last ten years. In
addition to permanent residents, the City has approximately 8,000 seasonal residents who
spend three to six months in the City. It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the
City are used by seasonal residents. The average occupancy is 2.5 persons per unit.
The housing stock as of 1993, is listed at 7,755 single family units, 481 multi -family units,
and 247 mobile homes, for a total of 8,483 units.
Ethnicity information from the 1980 Census, for the area that is now the City_ of La Quinta
revealed that 80.0% of the La Quinta resident population as caucasian, 14.7% as Hispanic,
2.3% as Afro-American, 1.1% as Asian, and .5% as Native American. The results of the
1990 Census show a mix of 70% Caucasian, 26% Hispanic, 1.6% Afro-American, 1.5%
Asian, and !.0% Native American.
The most current information available on employment of La Quinta residents is from the
1980 Census. At that time, almost 57% of the La Quinta workforce worked at white collar
jobs, while 43% were in blue collar occupations. The major employers in the City include
the La Quinta Hotel and Resort, PGA West, Von's, Simon Motors, City of La Quinta,
WalMart, Albertson's, and Ralph's.
Local Environmental Setting
The proposed project area is an existing asphalt parking lot.
A. Would the project cumulatively exceed official regional or local population
projections?
No Impact. The proposed convention facility will result in no new residential units.
Temporary construction jobs will be created if the project is built. New jobs related to the
operation of the future ballroom will also be created.
B. Would the project induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of
major infrastructure)?
No Impact. The proposed building will provide a second ballroom facility that will permit
a new large group meeting facility for the City. This will attract additional convention and
conference groups to the hotel which will result in additional bed tax paid to the City. It is
not anticipated that additional development will result from the construction of the
ballroom
C. Would the project displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?
No Impact. There are no housing units on the project site. The proposed ballroom
facilities will be constructed with private funds. (Source: Application Materials; Site
Survey)
3.3 - EARTH RESOURCES
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta has a varied topography, from gently sloping alluvial fans, steep
hillsides, to relatively flat desert floor. The alluvial soils that make up most of the City's
soil types are underlain by igneous -metamorphic rock, as seen in outcrops in the Santa
Rosa Mountains and the Coral reef Mountains. Soils on the valley floor are made up of
very fine grain unconsolidated silty sands.
Local Environmental Setting
The area where the project is proposed is a developed resort complex. A review of
historical aerial photographs indicates that the site has had structures on it since the 1920's
when the first hotel building was constructed. The elevation of the project site is
approximately 50 feet above msl. There has been no recorded seismic activity from the
nearby inferred faults, thus, there is a low probability for such activity. The City of La
Quinta lies in a seismically active region of Southern California. Faults in the area include
the San Andreas fault located several miles to the north of the City. Faults within the City
include two inferred faults transecting the southern section of La Quinta.
A. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismicity: fault rupture?
Less Than Significant Impact. There are two inferred faults in the southern area of the
City. One fault is located approximately 1.5 miles northeast of the project site, while the
other lies approximately 1.5 miles south. These faults are considered potentially active,
although no activity has been recorded for the last 10,000 years. A major earthquake
along the fault would be capable of generating seismic hazards and strong groundshaking
effects in the area. None of the inferred faults in La Quinta have been placed in an Alquist-
Priolo Special Studies Zone. Thus, no fault rupture hazard is anticipated for the project
site. (Source: Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan; City of La Quinta General
Plan; City of La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment)
B. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismic ground shaking?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The proposed ballroom project will be subject
to groundshaking hazards from regional and local earthquake events. The proposed
project will bring people to the site who will be subject to these hazards. The project site
is within Groundshaking Zone III. The ballroom facilities and subterranean parking garage
will be required to meet current seismic standards to reduce the risk of structural collapse.
C. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismicity: ground failure or liquefaction?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project site is not anticipated to be subject
to ground failure hazards from earthquake or other events. The La Quinta General Plan
indicates that the project site is not within a recognized liquefaction hazard area. The
majority of the City has a very low liquefaction susceptibility due to the fact that ground
water levels are generally at least ,100 feet below the ground surface.
D. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
seismicity: seiche or tsunami or volcanic hazard?
No Impact. The City is located inland from the Pacific Ocean and would not be subject
to a tsunami. Lake Cahuilla, a man-made reservoir located in the southeast area of the
City, might experience some moderate wave activity as a result of an earthquake and
groundshaking. However, the lake is not anticipated to affect the City in the event of a
levee failure or seiche.
E. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
landslides or mudslides?
Less Than Significant Impact. The immediate project site is within an existing parking
lot that is several hundred feet away from the Santa Rosa Mountains. Thus, the project
would not be impacted by potential mudslides or landslides.
F. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation,
grading or fill?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom facilities, if built, will require
extensive excavation for the subterranean parking garage. Hazard barracades shall be
placed around the excavation site to warn pedestrians of open constriction activities.
•
10
G. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
subsidence of the land?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is not located in an area which is
considered to have subsidence hazards, according to the La Quinta MEA. Dynamic
settlement results in geologically seismic areas where poorly consolidated soils mix with
perched groundwater causing dramatic decreases in the elevation of the ground. (Source:
La Quinta MEA)
H. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving
expansive soils?
Less than Significant Impact. The underlying soils on the project site consist of Indio
Very Fine Sandy Loam (Is) and Gilman Silt Loam (GeA). Is soil has very slow runoff;
slight erosion hazard, and no flood hazards associated with it. The shrink/swell capacity is
low. The GeA soil has slow runof, slight erosion, and flooding is rare. Shrink/swell is
low. (Source: Soil Survey of Riverside County, California, Coachella Valley Area)
I. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts_ involving
unique geologic or physical features?
Less than Significant Impact. The Coral Reef Mountains and the Santa Rosa Mountains
represent unique geologic features in the La Quinta area. These unique geologic features
are not located within the project site or near enough to the project to be affected by the
proposed ballroom hotel expansion request.
3.4 WATER
Regional Environmental Setting
Groundwater resources in the La Quinta area consist of a system of large aquifers (porous
layer of rock material) and groundwater basins separated by bedrock or layers of soil that
trap or retain groundwater. La Quinta is located above the Coachella Valley Groundwater
Basin which is the major supply of water for the potable water needs of the City as well as
a significant supply for the City's nonpotable irrigation needs. Water is pumped from the
underground aquifer via thirteen wells in the City operated and administered by the
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). La Quinta is located primarily in the lower
thermal subarea of the groundwater basin. The Thermal Subarea is separated into the
upper and lower valley sub -basins near Point Happy Ranch, located southwest of the
intersection of Washington Street and State Highway 111. CVWD estimates that
approximately 19.4 million acre feet of water is stored within the Thermal Subarea which
is available for use. Water supplies are also augmented with surface water from the
Colorado River transported via the Coachella Canal.
The quality of water in the City is highly suitable for domestic purposes. However,
chemicals associated with agricultural production in nearby areas and the use of septic
tanks in the Cove area affect groundwater quality. Groundwater is of marginal to poor
quality at depths of less than 200 feet. Below 200 feet, water quality is generally good and
water depths of 400 to 600 feet is considered excellent.
Percolation from the tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the
Santa Rosa Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial
recharging of groundwater will be a requirement in the near future.
Surface water in La Quinta is comprised of Colorado River water supplied via the
Coachella Canal and stored in Lake Cahuilla; lakes in private development which are
comprised of canal water and/or untreated ground water; and the Whitewater River and its
tributaries. The watersheds in La Quinta are subject to intense storms of short duration
which results in substantial runoff. The steep gradient of the Santa Rosa Mountains
accelerates the runoff flowing in the intermittent streams that drain the mountain
watersheds.
One of the primary sources of surface water pollution is erosion and sedimentation from
development construction and operation activities. Without controls total dissolved solids
(TDS) an increase significantly from the development activities. The Clean Water Act
requires all communities to conform to standards regulating the quality of water
discharged into streams, including stormwater runoff. The National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) has been implemented as a two-part permitting process, for
which the City of La Quinta is participating in completing permitting requirements.
Local Environmental Setting
The proposed project site does not have any standing water on it or near by. The nearest
stands of surface water consist of several small lakes located on the resort golf courses. It
has been calculated that the proposed ballroom facilities will consume 8,880 gallons of
water per day.
A. Would the project result in changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff?
Less Then Significant Impact. The proposed project will not require additional drainage
facilities. There is an existing drainage system for the resort complex that directs runoff to
the existing golf course lakes.
B. Would the project result in exposure of people or property to water -related
hazards such as flooding?
Less than Significant Impact. The site is within a designated 100 year flood plain zone
(Zone A). The hazard factors for this zone have not been determined. However, there are
existing flood control facilities in the Cove area that will protect the project site.
12
C. Would the project result in discharge into surface waters or other alteration
of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
Less than Significant Impact. Runoff from the project site will be directed to the
existing drainage system on the resort complex which ultimately terminates in the golf
course lakes.
D. Would the project result in changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
No Impact. No increase in runoff is expected since the project site is an existing paved
parking lot. The proposed ballroom will not expand the paved area, but rather incorporate
part of the existing paved area into the proposed building site. (Source: Proposed Site
Plan)
E. Would the project result in changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements?
No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have any substantial bodies of water or
rivers. There are many small man-made lakes and ponds on golf courses within the City.
The Whitewater River and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel are stormwater channels
that are usually dry except for runoff from seasonal storms.
F. Would the project result in changes in quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawl, or through interception of an aquifer
by cuts or by excavations?
No Impact. Water supply in the City is derived from groundwater and supplementary
water brought in from the Colorado River. Development of the ballroom will consist of
open meeting area, banquet storage areas, an office area, and restore facilities. Existing
kitchen facilities in the hotel restaurants will be utilized for food preparation. Consumption
calculation indicates that the ballroom would require 8,880 gals./day of water.
G. Would the project result in altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
No Impact. The proposed project will not have a significant effect on groundwater wells.
It is not anticipated that there will be any alteration to the direction or rate of flow of the
groundwater supply. No wells are proposed for the project.
H. Would the project result in impacts to groundwater quality?
No Impact. The proposed ballroom will be constructed in an existing paved parking lot,
thus, there will be no additional pavement placed on the hotel site to reduce the absorption
13
ability of the ground. Stormwater runoff will be directed into the existing drainage system
at the resort which culminates in the golf course lakes.
3.5 AIR QUALITY
Regional Environmental Setting
The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD), and in particular the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB). SEDAB
has a distinctly different air pollution problem than the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). A
discussion of the jurisdictional organization and requirements is found in the La Quinta
MEA)
The air quality in Southern California region has historically been poor due to the
topography, climatological influences, and urbanization. State and federal clean air
standards established by the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) are often exceeded. The SCAQMD is a regional agency charged
with the regulation of pollutant emissions and the maintenance of local air quality
standards. The SCAQMD samples air quality at over 32 monitoring stations in and around
the Basin. According to the 1989 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan, SEDAB
experiences poor air quality, but to a lesser extent that then SCAB. Currently, the SEDAB
does not meet federal standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter. In the
Coachella Valley, the standards for PM 10 are frequently exceeded. PM 10 is particulate
matter 10 microns or less in diameter that becomes suspended in the air due to winds,
grading activity, and by vehicles on unpaved roads, among other causes.
Local Environmental Setting
The City is located in the Coachella Valley, which has a and climate, characterized by hot
summers, mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and low humidity. Variations in
rainfall, temperatures, and localized winds occur throughout the valley due to the presence
of the surrounding mountains. Air quality conditions are closely tied to the prevailing
winds of the region.
The City of La Quinta is subject to the SCAQMD AQMD, a plan which describes
measures to bring the SCAB into compliance with federal and state air quality standards
and to meet California Clean Air Act requirements. The General Plan for the City contains
an Air Quality Element outlining mitigation measures as required by the Regional AQMP.
The City is located within Source Receptor Area (SRA) 30, which includes two air quality
monitoring stations, one located in the City of Palm Springs and one in the City of Indio.
The Indio station monitors conditions which are most representative of the La Quinta
area. The station has been collecting data for ozone and particulate matter since 1983. The
Palm Springs station monitors carbon monoxide in addition to ozone and particulate
matter and has been in operation since 1985.
14
A. Would the project violate any air standard or contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. There will be some pollutants as a result of vehicular
traffic during the construction phases and from employees and visitor to the ballroom.
According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Table 6-2, the proposed
project best fits with the Restaurant category under the Commercial land use threshold of
20,000 square feet of area. The proposed building area for the ballroom project will be
37,000 square feet, which is more than the threshold. However, the proposed ballroom
facilities are ancillary to the resort hotel complex. Thus, there would be a significant air
quality impact resulting from the proposed project. The Significance Emission Thresholds
established by the District consist of the following:
55 pounds per day of ROG
55 pounds per day of Nox
274 pounds per day of CO
150 pounds per day of PM10
150 pounds per day of Sox
State 1 -hour or 8 -hour standard for CO
Projects that exceed the above thresholds with daily operation -related emissions (averaged
over a 7 -day week) are considered to be significant. Calculations were made for the
proposed ballroom. A 180 -day construction period was assumed for the following short
term construction impact:
ROG 39.3 lbs./day
Nox 575.9 lbs./day
CO 125.2 lbs./day
PM10 40.9 lbs./day
Long Term Mobile Emissions consist of the following:
ROG 225.3 lbs./day
Nox 97.7 lbs./day
Co 2037.2 lbs./day
PM10 20.0lbs./day
Long Term consist of the following:
ROG 225.4
Nox 103.2
CO 2038.2
PM10 20.2
SEDAB Thresholds:
15
ROG 75
Nox 100
CO 550
PM10 150
Difference: Project and SEDAB Thresholds:
ROG
-150.4
Nox
-48.2
CO
-1488.2
PM10
129.8
Percent Over Thresholds:
ROG 300.5%
Nox 103.2%
CO 370.6%
PM10 13.4%
Thus, there is a potential for significant impact from the development of the Ballroom. A
detailed air quality analysis shall be required to be submitted to the Community
Development Department prior to issuance of grading or building permits. The analysis
shall include recommended mitigation measures.
B. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive Receptors include schools, day care centers,
parks and recreation areas, medical facilities, rest homes, and other land uses that include
concentrations of individuals recognized as exhibiting particular sensitivity to air pollution.
The adjacent land uses consist of residential and golf development to the immediate west
and south, with scattered residential to the adjacent north. Directly adjacent to the south
is the existing hotel and restaurant complex, to which the proposed ballroom will be
attached.
The closest schools are Truman Elementary school and the La Quinta Middle School
located at the northwest corner of Avenue 50 and Park Avenue. The closest existing park
is the Village park located in the Cove area, south of the project site. The closest known
day care center is the YMCA Preschool located adjacent to Truman Elementary School.
The closest medical facility is a doctors office located on Calle Tampico, near Washington
Street, over a mile from the project site.
C. Would the project alter air movements, moisture, temperature, or cause any
change in climate?
16
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any
significant impacts upon this issue area. The proposed ballroom facilities will be required
to meet height and setback requirements, maintaining a compatible architectural style with
the existing structures in the resort complex.
D. Would the project create objectionable odors?
Less Than Significant Impacts. The proposed ballroom is not anticipated to create any
objectionable odors. Food preparation will be done in the existing restaurant kitchens.
There could be some noticeable odors from exhaust emissions from vehicles using the
subterranean parking garage under the ballroom. These odor, if detectable at all, will not
be significant.
3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
Regional Environmental Setting
La Quinta is a desert community of over 16,000+ permanent residents. There is a
substantial portion of the City that is undeveloped. The existing circulation system is a
combination of early roadwork constructed by Riverside County and new roadways since
incorporation of the City in 1982. Key roadways include State Highway 111, Washington
Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, and Eisenhower Drive.
Traffic volumes in La Quinta experience considerable seasonal variation, with the late -
winter, early spring months representing the peak tourist season and highest traffic
volumes.
Existing transit service for the City is limited to three regional fixed -route bus routes
operated by Sunline Transit Agency. One bus route along Washington Street connects the
Cove and Village areas with the community of Pahn Desert to the west. Two lines operate
along Highway 111 serving trips between La Quinta and other communities in the desert.
There are some existing pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian facilities in La Quinta, however,
these systems are to be completed as new developments come to the City.
Local Environmental Setting
The project site is within the La Quinta Resort and Club complex, in an existing parking
lot area. The project, as well as the hotel, are accessed by Avenida Fernando, (a private 2 -
way road) located immediately north of the parking lot.
A. Would the project result in increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
Less Than Significant Impact. The ballroom facilities are projected to serve as an
accessory to the existing hotel and resort facilities. The users of the ballroom will for the
�J
17
most part be staying at the hotel. Thus, there should not be any significant increase in
vehicle trips or traffic congestion.
B. Would the project result in hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersection) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm
equipment)?
No Impact. There are currently no hazards from design features of the existing roadway
or the proposed project. The proposed project does not include any new roadways or the
alteration of any existing roadways. It does eliminate a portion of an existing parking lot,
which will alter circulation in the parking lot in order access the underground parking
garage. There are no obvious hazardous design feature associated with the project.
C. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom project will not obstruct
emergency access to the surrounding area.
D. Would the project result in insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
Less Than Significant Impact. A total of 91 parking spaces are proposed in the
underground parking garage. The existing parking lot has 324 spaces, of which 76 will be
eliminated by the new ballroom. The resort and hotel complex require a total of 1,523
spaces excluding the ballroom since it has been determined that the ballroom is primarily
for on-site guests or patrons. Otherwise, the total number of parking spaces needed would
be 2,923. A shared parking plan is permitted by the Off -Street Parking Code if certain
standards can be met. The shared parking program under Chapter 9.160.035 of the
Municipal Code will permit parking spaces based on a parking analysis with the highest
usage requirement setting the parking requirement. The study indicated that the highest
usage was at 9:00 p.m. with a parking need of 1032 spaces. These standards have been
met in this proposed project. (Source: ULI Analysis; Site Plan)
E. Would the project result in hazards or barriers for pedestrian or bicyclists?
Less Than Significant Impact. Eisenhower Drive, in the vicinity of the resort complex,
is a designated bikeway corridor. The proposed project is not anticipated to have any
impact upon the corridor. Pedestrians crossing the existing parking lot will be required to
go around the ballroom building depending upon the direction in which they are walking.
The existing stamped concrete walkway will be replaced with a new pedestrian arcade
leading to the existing hotel and restaurant buildings. Thus, there should be minimal
impact upon pedestrians or bicyclists. (Source: Proposed Site Plan)
F. Would the project result in conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
•
•
18
No Impact. The proposed ballroom will not interfere with the existing alternative
transportation modes and facilities or create new modes and facilities at the resort
complex. (Source: Proposed Site Plan)
G. Would the project result in rail, waterborne, or air traffic impacts?
No Impact. There is no rail service in the City of La Quinta. There are no navigable
rivers or waterways, or air travel lanes within the City limits. Thus, there will be no
impacts upon these issues.
3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta lies within the Colorado Desert. Two ecosystems are found within
the City; the Sonoran Desert Scrub and the Desert Transition. The disturbed environments
within the City are classified as urban or agricultural. A discussion of these ecosystems is
found in the La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment.
Local Environmental Setting
The project site is located within the Sonoran Desert Scrub ecosystem. Typically,
undeveloped land in this environment is rich in biological resources and habitat. This
ecosystem is the most typical environment in the Coachella Valley. It is generally
categorized as containing plants which have then ability to economize water use, go
dormant during periods of drought, or both. Cacti are very common in these areas due to
their ability to store water. Other plants root deeply and draw upon water from
considerable depths. The variations of desert vegetation result from differences in the
availability of water. The most dense and lush vegetation in the desert is found where
groundwater is most plentiful.
The Sonoran Scrub areas are considered habitat for a number of small mammals and birds.
These animals escape the summer heat through their nocturnal and/or burrowing
tendencies. Squirrels, mice and rats are all common rodent species in this environment.
The black -tailed hare is a typical mammal. Predator species include kit fox, coyote, and
mountain lion in the higher elevations. The largest mammal found in this area is the
Peninsular Big Horn sheep which is found at the higher elevation of the Santa Rosa and
San Jacinto Mountain ranges. Birds and amphibians/reptiles can also be found in the
Sonoran Scrub area.
The project site is developed and has been for approximately 70 years. Thus, any potential
biological resources or habitat has been long gone from the site. The La Quinta MEA
indicates that the vicinity of the project site is within the traditional habitat of the Black -
tailed Gnatcatcher bird. There is no existing habitat left on the resort complex.
0
•
19
A. Would the project result in impacts to endangered, threatened, or rare
species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds)?
No Impact. The proposed project site has been developed for approximately 70 years,
thus all habitat has been destroyed. (Source: Site Survey)
B. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated species (e.g. heritage
trees)?
No Impact. There are no locally designated biological resources within the City of La
Quinta. All significant biological resources are designated by the California Department of
Fish & Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (Source: La Quinta MEA; Site
Survey)
C. Would the project result in impacts to locally designated natural
communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
No Impact. There are no locally designated natural communities found on or near the
project site. Surrounding land uses include golf course, hotel units, single family homes,
restaurants, retail shops, and parking lots.
D. Would the project result in impacts to wetland habitat (e.g. marsh,
riparian, and vernal pool)?
No Impact. There are no wetlands, marshes, riparian communities, or vernal pools within
the City. (Source: La Quinta MEA)
E. Would the project result in impacts to wildlife dispersal or migration
corridors?
No Impact. There are no known wildlife corridors within the project area. (Source: La
Quinta MEA)
3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta contains both areas of insignificant and significant Mineral
Aggregate Resources Areas (SMARA), as designated by the State Department of
Conservation. There are no known oil resources in the City. Major energy resources used
in the City come from the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), Southern California Gas
Company, and gasoline companies.
Local Environmental Setting
•
•
20
There are no oil wells, or other fuel or energy producing resources on the proposed project
site. The project site is located within MRZ-3, a designation for areas containing mineral
deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data.
A. Would the project conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
No Impact. The City of La Quinta does not have an adopted energy plan. However, the
City does have a Transportation Demand Management Ordinance in place that focuses on
the conservation of fuel. The Housing Element contains requirements for efficiency in
housing construction and materials, thus reducing energy consumption. The ballroom
development will be required to meet Title 24 energy requirements in its construction. No
other mitigation is required or feasible for this project.
B. Would the project use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient
manner?
Less Than Significant Impact. Natural resources that may be used by this project
include, air, mineral, water, sand and gravel, timber, energy, metals, and other resources
needed for construction. Any landscaping will also be required to comply with the
landscape water conservation ordinance as well as the requirements of the Coachella
Valley Water District for water management.
3.9 RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH
Regional Environmental Setting
Recent growth pressure has dramatically increased the City's exposure to hazardous
materials. Such exposure to toxic materials can occur through the air, in drinking water, in
food, in drugs and cosmetics, and in the work place. Although large scale, hazardous
waste generating employment is not yet located within La Quinta, the existence of
chemicals utilized in dry cleaning operations, agricultural operations, restaurant kitchen
cleaning, landscape irrigation and exposure to large scale electrical facilities may pose
significant threats to various sectors of the population. Currently, there are no hazardous
disposal waste sites located in Riverside County, transportation of such materials out of
and through La Quinta takes place.
Local Environmental Setting
In order to comply with AB 2948 -Hazardous Waste Management Plans and Facility Siting
Procedures, the City of La Quinta adopted Ordinance 184 consisting of a Hazardous
Waste Management Plan, The project site has not been used for any type of manufacturing
in the recorded past.
A. Would the project involve a risk of accidental explosion or release of
hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals,
or radiation)?
21
Less than Significant Impact. There is a minimal risk from cleaning chemicals and
compounds used in the maintenance of the ballroom facilities. No other risks have been
identified or are anticipated.
B. Would the project involve possible interference with an emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Then Significant Impact. Construction and excavation activities will be confined
to the proposed parking lot area where the building will be sited, except for minimal off-
site work as will be necessary for the project. These activities will not interfere with
emergency responses to the resort complex or the surrounding areas nor will it obstruct
emergency evacuation of the area.
C. Would the project involve the creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazards?
No Impact. There are no anticipated health hazards associated with the proposed
ballroom. Any hazards would be less than significant.
D. Would the project involve exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards?
No Impact. There are no existing health hazards on the proposed project site. The
proposed ballroom is not expected to create any health hazards, as long as OSHA and
County Health Department safety regulations are followed by employees. The ballroom
will be required to conform to zoning standards and all applicable health and safety codes
of the City.
E. Would the proposed involve increased fire hazard in areas with flammable
brush, grass, or trees?
No Impact. The proposed project site is an existing paved parking lot within a developed
resort complex. There is no flammable vegetation near the project site.
3.10 NOISE
Regional Environmental Setting
Noise levels in the City are created by a variety of sources in and near the City. The major
sources include vehicular noise on City streets and Highway 111, and temporary
construction noises. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along the
highway and major arterials.
Local Environmental Setting
The ambient noise level at the project site is dominated by vehicular traffic noise from
Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Fernando, the closest paved roads.
•
•
22
Residential areas are considered noise -sensitive land uses, especially during the nighttime
hours. The nearest residential use is located within the resort complex.
A. Would the project result in increases in existing noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Any increase in vehicular noise resulting from the
development of the ballroom is anticipated to be insignificant. The existing (1992) noise
levels for the project site range between 50 to 60 dBA. Staff has determined that the
proposed ballroom is most compatible with the Auditorium/Concert Hall land use
category in Table 6.3 of the La Quinta MEA. Table 6.3, Land Use Compatibility for
Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL), indicates that this land use has a normally
acceptable noise range of 55 to 60 dBA, and that above this range is unacceptable. In
order for ballroom to have a less than significant noise impact, the operational noise levels
will not be able to exceed 60 dBA/CNEL. Construction materials and design should take
noise containment and reduction into account for the ballroom.
B. Would the project result in exposure of people to severe noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta General Plan regulates excessive noise
and vibration in the City be establishing allowable noise levels for various land uses.
Auditorium and Concert Hall land uses should have a maximum exterior noise level of up
to 60 dBA. If the ambient noise level is higher than this standard, then it will serve as the
standard.
The proposed project will result in short-term impacts associated with construction
activities. During construction, heavy machinery will be capable of generating periodic
peak noise levels ranging from 70 to 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source. The
Municipal Code regulates construction hours to which the developer must comply.
(Source: La Quinta General Plan)
3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES
Regional Environmental Setting
Law enforcement service are provided to the City through a contract with the Riverside
County Sheriffs Department. The Sheriffs Department extends service to the City from
existing facilities located in the City of Indio. The Department utilizes a planning standard
of 1.5 deputies per 1,000 population to forecast additional public safety personnel
requirements in the City at buildout. Based on this standard, the City is currently
underserved.
Fire protection service is provided to the City by Riverside County Fire Department, The
Fire Department administers two stations in the City; Station #32 on Old Avenue 52, at
Ae. Bermudas, and Station #70, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. The
Fire Department is also responsible for building and business inspections, plan review, and
23
construction inspections. Based upon a planning standard of one paid firefighter per 1,000
population, the City is currently underserved. The Fire Department has indicated that a
need exists for a third fire station in the northern part of the City between Washington
Street and Jefferson Street.
Structural fires and fires from other man-made features are the most significant fire threats
in the City. Hillside and brush fires are minimal as the hillside areas are barren and the
scattered brush on the valley floor is too sparse to pose a serious fire threat.
Desert Sands Unified School District and the Coachella Valley Unified School District
serve the City. There is one elementary school, one middle school, and one high school
within the City. These schools are within the Desert Sands Unified School District. The
City is also within the College of the Desert Community College District.
Library services are provided by the Riverside County Library System with a branch
library located in the Village area of the City. The existing facility opened in 1988 and
contains 2,065 square feet of space and approximately 18,000 volumes. The County
unadopted planning standards are 0.5 square feet per capita and 1.2 volumes per capita to
forecast future facility requirements. Utilizing these standards, in 1992, the City was
underserved in space but overserved in terms of volumes.
Health care services are provided in the City through JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio, and
the Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility located in the Plaza La Quinta Shopping Center.
The Eisenhower Immediate Care Facility is a satellite clinic of the Eisenhower Medical
Center, located in Rancho Mirage. The Riverside County Health Department administers a
variety of health programs for area residents and is located in Indio. Paramedic services
are provided by Springs Ambulance Service.
Local Environmental Setting
The nearest fire station to the project is Station 932 located approximately one mile
southeast. Governmental services in La Quinta are provided by City staff at the Civic
Center and by County, State, and federal agency offices in the desert and region.
A. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or
altered governmental services in relation to fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The development of the project will increase the need for
fire protection due to the construction of 37,000 square feet of building area. The
development shall comply with the fire flow and fire safety building standards of the
Riverside County Fire Code to prevent fire hazard on-site and to minimise the need for
fire protection services. Unobstructed fire access will be required. Other code
requirements (such as fire sprinkler systems, construction materials, etc.) will be required.
B. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in the need for new or
altered government services in relation to police protection?
24
Less Than Significant Impact. The Riverside County Sheriffs Department responded
with comments on this project. They had no negative comment and stated that the project
will not significantly impact the Sheriffs Department's ability to provide services. Ample
exterior and address lighting is requested by the Department.
C. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in relation to school services?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be subject to payment of
school impact fees to mitigate potential impacts on local schools.
D. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in relation to the maintenance of public facilities
including roads.
No Impact. The roadways within the resort complex are privately maintained, thus there
will be no impact upon maintenance of public roads.
E. Would the project have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in relation to other governmental services?
Less Than Significant Impact. Building, engineering, planning, and inspection services
provided by the City will be partially offset by application fees charged to the developer.
Business license and code enforcement services will be provided by the City of La Quinta.
3.12 UTILITIES
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta is served by the Imperial irrigation District (IID) for electrical
power supply and the Southern California Gas Company (SCG) for natural gas service.
Existing power and gas lines and substations are found throughout the City. IID has four
substations in La Quinta, with electricity generated by a steam plant in El Centro and
Hydroelectric power generated by the All American Canal. General Telephone Exchange
(GTE) provides telephone services for the City. Colony Cablevision services the area for
cable television service.
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides water service to the City. CVWD
obtains its water from underground aquifers and from the Colorado River. CVWD
operates a water system with potable water pumped from 13 wells in the City. The wells
range in depth from 500 to 900 feet. Potable water is stored in five reservoirs located in
the City.
The City's stormwater drainage system is administered by the CVWD, which maintains
and operates a comprehensive system to collect and transport flows through the City. The
•
25
City is served by Waste Management of the Desert for solid waste disposal.
Nonhazardous, mixed municipal solid waste is taken to three landfills within the Coachella
Valley.
Local Environmental Setting
There is an existing storm drainage system in place at the resort complex. Runoff is
directed to the golf course lakes for retention and absorption. All utilities exist at the
project site.
A. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations
to power and gas services?
Less Than Significant Impact. Power, sewer, and gas lines has been brought in to the
resort complex. The proposed ballroom facilities will require sewer, water, natural gas,
and electricity. The projected electrical consumption has been calculated to be 1.039 kWH
per day. Natural gas consumption is calculated at 2,434 cubic feet per day. (Source:
Utiligen)
B. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration
to communication systems?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom will require service from GTE or
another purveyor for telephone communication. It is anticipated that an internal
communication system will be installed in the ballroom that is an extension of the existing
system at the resort complex.
C. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations
to local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom facility will require water
service. It is not anticipated that the development will result in any significant adverse
impact. on local water resources. Water consumption is calculated at 8,880 gallons per day
for the project. (Source: Utiligen)
D. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations
to sewer services or septic tanks?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom will generate sewage which will
have to be transported and treated by CVWD. The developer will be responsible for the
cost of connection to the sewer system. Sewage generation is calculated at 7,400 gallons
per day for the project. (Source: Utiligen)
E. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration
to storm water drainage?
C
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is current an existing paved parking lot.
There will be no additional pavement as a result of the construction of the ballroom. There
is an existing storm drainage system within the resort complex. That system will serve this
project.
F. Would the project result in a need for new systems, or substantial alteration
to solid waste disposal?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom will require solid waste disposal
service from Waste Management of the Desert or other purveyor. Solid waste may be
transported to the three existing landfills in the Coachella Valley. These landfills are
reaching capacity and may be closed in the near future. Any on-site programs for recycling
will be coordinated with Waste Management. Solid waste generation for this project is
calculated at 259 per day. (Source: La Quinta General Plan; Utiligen)
3.13 AESTHETICS
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta is partially located within a desert valley cove. There are hillsides to
the west and south of the City. Views of the desert and surrounding mountains are visible
on clear days throughout most of the City.
The project site is located in a developed resort complex ion the west central portion of
the City. The proposed ballroom height will not exceed that of the existing buildings in the
complex. Architectural style and exterior colors will match or be compatible with that of
the existing buildings nearby.
A. Would the project affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
No Impact. The project site is located within a resort complex, away from any public
roadway. The proposed ballroom will not be seen from Eisenhower Drive, the closest
public roadway. The new structure will not adversely impact scenic vistas.
B.. Would the project have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed ballroom will be required to comply with
architectural and landscaping policies and ordinances of the City. Thus, there should not
be a significant adverse impact upon the aesthetic qualities of the surrounding area.
C. Would the project create light or glare?
Less Than Significant Impact. The anticipated development of the ballroom will include
exterior security lighting which will cumulatively contribute to the existing light and glare
emanating from the resort complex. All lighting fixtures shall be required to comply with
the Dark Sky Ordinance and other current policies of the City concerning lighting issues.
27
3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Regional Environmental Setting
The history of the La Quinta area extends back to an era when much of the lower
Coachella Valley was inundated by ancient Lake Cahuilla. Early inhabitants of the
Colorado Desert were people who had migrated across the Bering Strait more than
20,000 years ago. As their migration progressed, they passed through the Colorado Desert
on their gradual way to Central America.
As time past, the Coachella Valley became the home to a band of people that migrated
from the Great Basin. Ethnographically these people are known as the Cahuilla. The
Cahuilla followed a hunting and gathering life style as they lived along the ancient
lakeshore and cove areas in the valley. The archaeological record, as it is known today,
extends back almost 6,000 years.
The Cahuilla were divided into three geographic areas: the Western or Pass Cahuilla
within the Agua Caliente (Palm Springs) area, the Desert Cahuilla (from Palm Springs east
to the Salton Sea ), and the mountain Cahuilla (south to San Jacinto Peak in the Santa
Rosa Mountains). Traveling across boundaries to exploit seasonal resources was a part of
their annual life cycle and life way. Anthropologist Alfred Kroeber estimated that the
population prior to white contact (2500 individuals) has been reduced to about 750 by
1923.
The most likely locations of prehistoric cultural resources in the La Quinta area are along
the foothills, however, many sites have been found in the open desert floor area. Camp
and village sites are usually located near sources of water, food, and shelter. Temporary
camp sites have been found near game trails, springs, mesquite groves, grass stands,
bedrock outcrops, marshy areas, or along the ancient lake shore line. isolated milling
features, sparse lithic scatters, and isolated pottery scatters have been found almost
anywhere in the City.
In 1540, the first European explorer, Captain Hernando de Alarcon, entered Southern
California at the Yuma crossing, which is located to the southeast of La Quinta.
Approximately 100 years later, Spanish missionaries visited the area. A trail was
established by the Cocomaricopa Indians across the Valley in 1821 as they carried mail
through the San Gorgonio Pass between Tucson and Mission San Gabriel.
White settlement in the Valley did not occur to any degree until the transcontinental
railroads were constructed. The construction of the railroads brought with it the
technology to drill water wells deep enough to sustain settlement in the valley. The
Bradshaw Trail brought in settlers and freight both before and after the construction of the
railroad. The Coachella Valley was the site of the most popular immigration route to the
southwest via the Southern Immigrant Trail. The Bradshaw Trail route passed through the
Valley until 1915 when a graded gravel road was developed for automobile travel.
•
28
The settling of the La Quinta area has been chronicled by the La Quinta historical Society
in several publications and museum exhibits. There are 13 designated historical structures
and sites recorded on the California Historic Resources Inventory. These resources are
listed in the La Quinta General Plan.
La Quinta experienced rapid growth in the late 1970's which lead to incorporation of the
City in 1982. The City has grown from a population of approximately 5,400 in 1982 to
over 16,000 in 1994. The incorporated boundaries currently include over 31 square miles
of area.
Local Environmental Setting
he proposed project site is locate within a designated historic resources, the La Quinta
Hotel. There are recorded archaeological sites to the west of the project site that are of a
prehistoric and protohistoric date. There are over a dozen recorded prehistoric
archaeological sites within a mile radius of the project site.
A. Would the project disturb paleontological resources?
Less Than Significant Impact. No significant paleontological resources have been
found on the hotel property or the near vicinity of the resort. The project site is on ground
that is higher than the highest stand of ancient Lake Cahuilla, thus it is not anticipated that
paleontological resources will be found in the project site.
B. Would the project disturb archaeological resources?
Less than Significant Impact. There are several archaeological resources within a one
mile radius of the project site. Both insignificant and significant sites have been recorded.
Prior to any excavation of the underground parking garage, a qualified, City -approved
archaeological monitor shall be enlisted to perform monitoring of all excavation and
trenching activities for the project. It is possible that subsurface cultural deposits exist at
the project site given the close proximity of known archaeological sites. The requirement
for such monitoring shall be made a condition of approval for the proposed project.
C. Would the project affect historical resources?
Less Than Significant Impact. The La Quinta Hotel is a designated local historic site.
The hotel has also been determined to be eligible for listing on the National Register of
Historic Places. The proposed ballroom addition will not impact the hotel structure or the
old grounds around the hotel. The architectural design of the ballroom is in keeping with
that of the historic portions of the resort complex. The project was reviewed by the City's
historic Preservation Commission, which forwarded a recommendation to the Planning
Commission for approval of the project as proposed.
29
D. Would the project have the potential to cause a physical change which would
affect unique cultural values?
No Impact. The development of the ballroom will not affect any known ethnic cultural
values.
E. Would the project restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
No Impact. There are no known religious functions or uses or sacred uses on the
proposed project site or adjacent to it.
3.15 RECREATION
Regional Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta has an adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan that assesses the
existing resources and facilities and the future needs of the City. The City contains
approximately 28.7 acres of developed parkland for Quimby Act purposes. The 845.0 acre
regional Lake Cahuilla Park is not included in this count. There are also bike and
equestrian pathways and trails within the City and designated pedestrian hiking trails.
A. Would the project increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks
or other recreational facilities?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include the subdivision of land for residential
units, therefore, there are no park fees required of the proposed project.
B. Would the project affect existing recreational opportunities?
No Impact. The anticipated ballroom project will not affect any existing park or
recreation facility. (Source: La Quinta Parks and Recreation Master Plan)
SECTION 4: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The Initial Study for the proposed ballroom addition could have potentially significant
adverse impacts on some of the environmental issues addressed in the checklist. The
potential significance can be lessen to levels below significance if the appropriate
mitigation measures are implemented. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) has been
prepared for this project based upon this environmental assessment.
The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings of significance set
forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines and based on the results of this
environmental assessment:
•
30
* The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, with the implementation of mitigation measures.
* The proposed project will not have the potential to achieve short term
goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals, with the successful
implementation of mitigation.
* The proposed project will not have impact which are individually limited
but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity.
* The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will
adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, with the
implementation of mitigation.
SECTION 5, EARLIER ANALYSES
a. Earlier Analyses Used.
Specific Plan 121-E was approved in 1975 by Riverside County. The project was required
to prepare an EIR (EIR 41). This project proposed an expansion to the hotel complex
with the construction of 637 condominium units, 420 hotel rooms, and 27 -hole golf
course with clubhouse and service facilities on 619+ acres.
In 1982, the Specific Plan was amended to allow and addition of 279 condominium units
and 146 hotel rooms. An environmental assessment was prepared for the revision which
resulted in the adoption of a Negative Declaration.
Five other subsequent amendments for revisions to the specific plan were approved
through 1989, each with a Negative Declaration being certified by the City.
This project was not part of the previous approvals and thus not assessed in associated
environmental assessments. The convention building was not considered prior to this
current request, with the exception of a traffic study prepared for the 1988 revision to add
340 units to the hotel.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed.
Not applicable.
C. Mitigation Measures.
31
Mitigation measures are discussed in this addendum where possible. A Mitigation
Monitoring Plan (MMP) has been prepared for the project that will become a part of the
conditions of approval attached to the project approvals and permits.