CC Resolution 2001-083 RESOLUTION NO. 2001-83
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING AN ADDENDUM
TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT #41 PREPARED
FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2001-078, ZONE
CHANGE 2001-101, SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E AMENDMENT
#5, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-703, AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30125
CASE NO: EIR #41 ADDENDUM
APPLICANT: KSL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on
the 5th and 19th day of June, 2001 hold duly noticed Public Hearings to consider an
Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41 for General Plan Amendment 2001-
078, Zone Change 2001-101, Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development
Permit 2001-703 and Tentative Tract Map 30125 located at the southeast corner of
Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive, and more particularly described as follows:
APN's 658-190-004, 773-020-033, 770-020-021, 773-020-034
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 8th and 22nd days of May, 2001 hold duly noticed Public Hearings to
consider an Addendum to Environmental impact Report #41 for General Plan
Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101, Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5,
Site Development Permit 2001-703 and Tentative Tract Map 30125 located at the
southeast corner of Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive; and
WHEREAS, said Addendum has complied with the requirements of "The
Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended;
Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community
Development Department has determined that although the proposed General Plan
Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101, Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5,
Site Development Permit 2001-703 and Tentative Tract Map 301 25 could have a
significant adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect
in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the
Addendum and included in the Conditions of Approval; 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 certifying said Addendum:
Re~olutlon No. 2001-83
KSL Development Corporation - EJR#41 Addendum
June 19, 2OO1
P~ge 2
1. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or
general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no
significant unmitigated impacts were identified by the Addendum.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 will not have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or
endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory.
3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the
potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the
wildlife depends.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 do not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as
no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the
Addendum.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 will not result in impacts which are individually
limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will
not be significantly affected by the proposed project.
5. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101,
Specific Plan 121-E Amendment #5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and
Tentative Tract Map 30125 will not have environmental effects that will
adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no
significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk
potential or public services.
Reeolution No. 2001
KSL Development Corporation - EIR#41 Addendum
Jtme 19, 2001
Pa~ 3
6. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may
have a significant effect on the environment.
7. The City Council has considered the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report
#41 and the Addendum reflects the independent judgement of the City.
8. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of
adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d).
9. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the
Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La
Quinta, California.
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 constitutes the findings of
- the City Council for this Addendum.
2. That it does hereby certify this Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41
for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Addendum
attached hereto and made part of.
3. That the Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #41 reflects the
independent judgement of the City.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADO~I~D at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
City Council held on this 19th day of June, 2001, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Mayor Peha
NOES: Council Member Sniff
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None JO ~PE~A~, ~ aver
City of La Quinta, California
Re~olufion No. 2001-83
KSL Development Corporation * EIR#41 Addendum
Jur~ 19, 2001
Page 4
A'I-I'EST:
J~~. G~I~EK, CMCi City Cl~r~-~
City of La Quinta, California
(City Seal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
M. KATHER~~orney
City of La Quinta, California
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(CEQA GUIDELINE 15164)
FOR
SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E, AMENDMENT #5
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2001-078,
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 2001-101,
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-703 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30125
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-080
Adopted May 22, 2001
City Council Resolution 2001-
Adopted June 19, 2001
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL1 21 E.WPD
The City of La Quinta, as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act,
Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq. ("CEQA") has prepared this Addendum
pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15164. This is an Addendum to Environmental Impact
Report //41 ("EIR") that the County of Riverside certified in 1975 for the La Quinta
Resort Specific Plan, SP 121-E.
The purpose of this Addendum is to document certain changes to the project which
will be implemented through the following land use approvals:
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2001-78,
AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO SPECIFIC PLAN 121-E,
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 2001-101,
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-70 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 30125
These are collectively referred to as "the Revised Project."
The Revised Project consists of 17.82 acres of the 622 acre project. Six acres of the
Revised Project area is currently designated Tourist Commercial and the remaining 11
acres is designated as Low Density Residential. The Revised Project will convert
currently vacant lands of which six acres os being used as interim employee parking
areas to Iow density residential lots, and ancillary facilities including a clubhouse and
associated amenities. The City has determined that the proposed residential
development will be consistent with the density and character of the adjacent
residential development, and will be consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives
of the City's General Plan and Specific Plan 121-E, as amended.
The Revised Project does not represent an increase in the total number of units allowed
within the Specific Plan boundary. The Specific Plan "cap" on residential units remains
622 units in the Iow density residential category. The approvals requested include the
following:
1. General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone to change the designation on six
acres of the 17.82 acres from Tourist Commercial to Low Density Residential;
2. Specific Plan Amendment to incorporate the General plan Amendment and Zone
Change above, and to expand the landscaping palette within the Specific Plan;
3. Site Development Permit to review the design of three residential unit types for
the proposed homes within the same 17.82 acres; and
4. Tentative Tract Map to divide the 17.82 acres into 65 single family lots, a
clubhouse lot, and a number of numbered lots for streets and common open
space areas.
The City has compared the impacts of the Revised Project with those impacts analyzed
in the EIR and finds as follows:
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL 121 E.WPD
Aesthetics - Impacts no Hazards and Hazardous Public Services -
greater than those Materials - Impacts no Impacts lower than
3reviously analyzed, greater than those those previously
The previously previously analyzed, analyzed. The impacts
approved Tourist associated with Tourist
Commercial designation Commercial
will be replaced with development would
less dense housing, have been expected to
The scale, height, and be greater than those
mass will all be associated.
reduced within this
area as compared with
the original project. The
elimination of employee
parking will be a
beneficial impact for
the area.
Agriculture Resources- Hydrology and Water Recreation - Impacts no
Not applicable Quality ~ Impacts lower greater than those
than those previously 3reviously analyzed.
analyzed. Tourist The Revised project will
commercial development include on-site
can be expected to clubhouse facilities, and
generate an equivalent will be surrounded by
amount of water usage golf course. The overall
as residential number of residential
development. The single units within the total
family homes on the project will not increase.
site, however, will Impacts to recreational
create a lower facilities will no1
percentage of increase over those
impervious surfaces, already analysed.
which will result in more
surface water
percolation.
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL121 E.WPD
Air Quality - Impacts no ! Land Use Planning - Transportation/Traffic-
greater than those Impacts no greater than Impacts less than those
previously analyzed, those previously previously analyzed. The
Although residential analyzed. The Revised single family units will
i development generates Project is consistent not increase the total
'a high number of trips with the goals, policies number of units to be
per unit, tourist and objectives of the constructed within the
c o m m e r c i a I General Plan and the project, and will
development is also a Specific Plan, and therefore not increase
high trip generator, c o n t i n u e s t h e the number of residential
Since the certification of development pattern trips to be generated by
the original EIR, PMIO established in the the project at buildout.
has become an issue of Specific Plan.
concern in the Coachella The elimination of the
Valley. The City requires tourist commercial
the development of development will reduce
PMIO management the overall number of
)lans, which are trips to and from the
reviewed and approved project at buildout.
by the City Engineer
prior to the issuance of
building permits. The
project proponent will
be required to submit
such a plan, which will
~rovide sufficient
mitigation to assure that
PMIO impacts are
reduced to less than
significant levels.
The construction air
quality impacts will be
reduced for single family
homes over those
analyzed for tourist
c o m m e r c ia
development in the EIR
since single family home
construction disturbs
less ground, is of
shorter duration, and
requires less equipment.
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddK SL1 21 E.WPD
Biological Resources - Biological Resources, Utilities and Service
impacts in addition to cont'd- Systems- Impacts less
those previously The than those previously
analyzed. Since Revised project also analyzed. The proposed
certification of the was identified as residential units will
original EIR, species of potential habitat for generate a lower need
concern in the Coachella Coachella Valley Fringe- for utilities and service
Valley have increased. A toed Lizard and !systems than
preliminary biological Coachella Valley Milk development of a tourist
resource analysis Vetch. Site surveys are commercial project on
conducted for the being conducted, and six acres of the site.
Revised Project the project proponent
indicated the presence will be required to
of a mesquite hummock conform to the
on the site, which will mitigation measures
be eliminated by the resulting from these
construction of the studies.
homes. Mesquite
hummocks provide
important habitat to a
number of species of
concern. In order to
mitigate this potential
impact, the following
mitigation measure shall
be implemented:
Prior to construction or
site preparation
activities, the project
developer shall enter
into a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU)
with CDFG and an
appropriate non-profit
organization whose
purpose is to acquire
and manage land for the
purpose of protecting
special status plants and
wildlife. This MOU shall
provide the organization
chosen the financial
resources necessary to
purchase and manage
1.1 acres of mesquite
hummock habitat in the
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL121 E.WPD
Cultural Resources Mineral Resources - Not Population and Housing -
Impacts no greater than applicable. Impacts less than those
those previously previously analyzed.
analyzed. The site has The change in and use
been previously designation will reduce
disturbed, and is not the potential number of
expected to contain jobs to be generated by
culturally significant the project overall, and
resources. Should will not create a need for
r e s o u r c e s b e additional housing,
encountered during site
grading and excavation,
the project proponent
shall cease all work on
the site until an
archaeological monitor
has been retained.
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL 1 21 E.WPD
Geology and Soils Noise - Impacts have
Impacts no greater than changed from those
those previously ~reviously analyzed. A
analyzed. The project noise impact analysis
proponent shall be was prepared for the
required to implement Revised Project. The
the Uniform Building noise analysis identified
Code for Zone Ill ~otential impacts to
groundshaking zones, homes adjacent to both
and shall be required to Avenue 50 and
prepare site-specific Eisenhower Drive. In
soils analysis prior to order to mitigate this
issuance of building impact, the following
permits, mitigation measures
shall be implemented.
1. A 6 foot wall above a
four foot berm shall be
erected on both the
Eisenhower Drive and
Avenue 50 frontages of
the Revised Project.
- 2. Interior noise levels
shall not exceed 45 dBA
CNEL.
3.AIl construction
activities shall be limited
to the hours prescribed
in the La Quinta
Municipal Code.
4. Construction
staging areas
shall be located
as far from
existing
residentia
development as
possible.
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL121 E.WPD
The City finds that consideration of the Revised Project does not call for the
preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15162 or Public
Resources Code Section 21166, in that the Revised Project does not involve:
1. substantial changes to the project analyzed in the EIR which would involve new
significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of
previously identified impacts;
2. substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project
is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the
environment not analyzed in the EIR substantially increase the severity of
previously identified impacts; or
3. new information of substantial importance which would involve new significant
effects on the environment not analyzed in the EIR substantially increase the
severity of previously identified impacts.
G:\WPDOCS\EIRAddKSL1 21 E.WPD