CC Resolution 2002-098RESOLUTION 2002-98
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-447
PREPARED FOR ZONE CHANGE 2002-107.
CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-447
APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 28th day of May, 2002 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to recommend
to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2002-447 for Zone
Change 2002-107 for Pre -annexation Zoning designations of lands located west of
Madison Avenue, east of Monroe Avenue, south of Avenue 60 and north of Avenue
62, and more particularly described as follows:
APNs: 764-270-005, 015; 764-280-001 thru 007, and 014.
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that
the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2002-447)
and has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant
adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case
because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the assessment and
included in the conditions of approval and a Mitigated 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 make the
following findings to justify recommending certification of said Environmental
Assessment:
1. The proposed project 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 Environmental Assessment 2002-447.
2. The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants
or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory.
Resolution No. 2002-98
Environmental Assessment 2002-447
Shea Homes - Trilogy
Adopted: June 18, 2002
Page 2
3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the
potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the
wildlife depends in that mitigation measures are imposed on the project that will
reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
4. The proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as
no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the
Environmental Assessment.
5. The proposed project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or
cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development
in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be
significantly affected by the proposed project.
6. The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely
affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant
impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential
or public services.
7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may
have a significant effect on the environment in that mitigation measures are
imposed on the project that will reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
8. The City Council has fully considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the
comments received hereon.
;i
9. The location'and custotdan of the City's records relating to this project is the
Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La
Quinta, California, 92253.
10. A Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP), a copy of which is attached is hereby
adopted pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 in order to assure
compliance with the mitigation measures during Project implementation.
11. The City Council has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the
presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d).
12. The Community Development Director shall cause to be filed with the County
Clerk a Notice of Determination pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15075(a).
Resolution No. 2002-98
Environmental Assessment 2002-447
Shea Homes - Trilogy
Adopted: June 18, 2002
Page 3
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the
City Council for this Environmental Assessment.
2. That it does hereby certify the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental
Assessment 2002-447 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated
in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum on file in the
Community Development Department and attached hereto.
3. That Environmental Assessment 2002-447 reflects the independent judgement
of the City.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
City Council held on this 18`h day of June, 2002, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Pena
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
JOFNN �'PEN/Vyayor
City ofa Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JUN REEK, CIVIC, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
(City Seal)
Resolution No. 2002-98
Environmental Assessment 2002-447
Shea Homes - Trilogy
Adopted: June 18, 2002
Page 4
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
M. KATH RINE JENSj7N, Ci Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
Environmental Checklist Form
1. Project Title: Zone Change 2002-107, Pre -Annexation Zoning
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Martin Magana, 760-777-7125
4. Project Location: Non-contiguous lots in Section 34, T.6S., R.7E., located
between Madison Street And Monroe Street, and
Between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of La Quinta
478-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (approximately 84
acres) and Open Space (approximately 31
acres).
7. Zoning: Current: W-2 (Controlled Development) and Residential
Agriculture.
Proposed: Low Density /Agricultural -Equestrian Residential and
Open Space.
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to
later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
Pre -Annexation Zoning designations are requested for lands currently in
unincorporated Riverside County. A parallel application has been made for a
portion of lands in the Coral Mountain Specific Plan, located in Section 34,
T.6S., R.7E. This request for pre -annexation zoning encompassed the balance
of the lands in this section which are not located in the Specific Plan.
Approximately 31 acres are currently zoned Agriculture in the County (located
at the centerline of the section, on its eastern boundary), and 86 acres are
zoned W-2, controlled development (located north and south of the centerline
of the section, along its western boundary). Approximately 31 acres within the
W-2 zoned lands include the Bureau of Reclamation flood control levee. The
total annexation area is 115 acres.
SACity Cie rk\Resolutions\EACkist.WPD
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
North: Vacant desert lands, agriculture, Coral Mountain Specific Plan
South: Agriculture, Open Space
West: Open Space, flood control levee
East: Coral Mountain Specific Plan, agriculture
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
Not applicable
S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\EACkIst.WPD 2
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this
project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as
indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics
Agriculture Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation/Traffic
Utilities and Service Systems
Mandatory Findings
Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared
�J
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 revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will
be prepared.
AN
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards„ and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets.
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects
that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
nothing further is required.
11111a t , �, , //� Az,"f,
S ature Date
PAMartin\Shea Homes-Trilogy\EACkIst.WPD
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following
each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls
outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on
project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well
as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well
as operational impacts.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated"
applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially
Significant Impact" to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation
measures from Section XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other
CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analysis are discussed in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to
information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page
or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources
used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. The analysis of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than
significance
SACity Clerk\Resolutions\EACkist.WPD 4
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
I. AESTHETICS: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan
EIR p. III-159 ff.)
b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
(General Plan EIR p. Ill- 159 ff.)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the
site and its surroundings? (Application materials)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application
materials)
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether impacts
to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and
Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Dept. Of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (General
Plan EIR p. III-21 ff.)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract? (Zoning Map)
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in
loss of Farmland, to nonagricultural use? (Aerial photographs)
III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established
by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air
Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? (SCAQMD
CEQA Handbook)
b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA
Handbook)
c) Result in a net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA
Handbook)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
(Project Description)
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
X
X
X
X
X
M
X
X
X
X
r
S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\EACkIst.WPD 5
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
(Project Description) X
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.)
b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game
or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment P.
73 ff.)
c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either individually or in
combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery
sites? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (La Quinta
Municipal Code; General Plan)
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental
Assessment p. 73 ff.)
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic
Resources, or a local register of historic resources? (Master
Environmental Assessment, p. 122 ff.)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique
archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or site about which it
can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current
body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains
information needed to answer important scientific research questions,
has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best
available example of its type, or is directly associated with a
scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or
person)? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 122 ff.)
c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (Master
Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5.9)
91
VA
X
X
/1
X
M
S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\EACkIst.WPD 6
VI.
V II.
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 122 ff.)
GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? (General Plan EIR p. III-61 ff.)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR p. III-61 ff.)
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General
Plan EIR p. III-61 ff.)
iv) Landslides? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan
MEA p. 96 ff)
c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on -
or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff)
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff)
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff)
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
(Application Materials)
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
likely release of hazardous materials into the environment?
(Application Materials)
c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances,
or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
(Application Materials)
d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials
Listing)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
r2
M
/:1
F.4
SACity Clerk\Resolutions\EACkIst.WPD 7
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (General Plan land use map)
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan
MEA p. 94 ff)
h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
(General Plan land use map)
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements? (General Plan EIR p. III-87
ff.)
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e.,
the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a
manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -
site? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.)
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR p. III-
87 ff.)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control?
(General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.)
f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood
hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit
6.5)
g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.5)
1N
X
M
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? (Project Description) X
S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\EACkIst.WPD 8
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of
an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited
to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect? (General Plan p. 18 ff.)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p.
73 ff.)
X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental
Assessment p. 71 ff.)
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.)
XI. NOISE: Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies? (General Plan MEA p. 110 ff.)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General Plan MEA p. 110 ff.)
c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
(General Plan MEA p. 110 ff.)
d) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Master Environmental
Assessment, p. 110 ff.)
e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive levels? (General Plan land use map)
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General
Plan, p. 9 ff.)
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application
Materials)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application
Materials)
/I
X
X
V1
X
X
X
X
91
X
KI
X
SACity Clerk\Resolutions\EACkIst.WPD
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan)
Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
XIV. RECREATION:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
(Application Materials)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials)
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan
EIR, p. III-29 ff.)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.)
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase
in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety
risks? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.)
d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)? (General Plan EIR, p. I1I-29 ff.)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials)
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials)
g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application Materials)
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\EACkIst.WPD 10
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan
MEA, p. 46 ff.)
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p.
46 ff.)
d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
(General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan
MEA, p. 46 ff.)
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
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
project, and the effects of probable future projects)?
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSIS.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
KI
X
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects
have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a
discussion should identify the following on attached sheets.
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review.
Environmental Impact Report 232, Coral Mountain Specific Plan. No earlier analysis were used in this review.
SACity Clerk\Resolutions\EACkIst.WPD 11
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
Not applicable.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the
mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address
site -specific conditions for the project.
See attached Addendum.
SOURCES:
Master Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 2002.
SCAQMD CEQA Handbook.
General Plan, City of La Quinta, 2002.
General Plan Environmental Impact Report, 2002.
City of La Quinta Municipal Code
S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\EACkIst.WPD 12
Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2002-447
II. a) Approximately 31 acres of the annexation area is currently designated
Agriculture under County Zoning. This area of the County is designated as Prime
Farmland in the County General Plan. The annexation itself will have no impact
on this designation. Should the 31 acres eventually be developed under the Low
Density/Agricultural-Equestrian Residential Designation, the land would be lost
to agriculture. The 31 acres is currently divided into a 19.4 and a 9.33 acre
parcel, and is surrounded on three sides (north, south and west) by the Coral
Mountain Specific Plan, which is under construction at this time. The parcels are
therefore isolated, and do not represent a long term valuable resource for
agriculture in the area. The impacts to agricultural resources are therefore not
expected to be significant.
III. a) The annexation itself will not result in any impact to air quality. The buildout of
the lands, however, would result in up to 336 single family residential units on
84 acres. These single family units will generate approximately 3,216 trips per
day on the regional roadway system', which will generate emissions which have
an impact on the air quality in the area. Based on this trip generation, the
project at buildout will generate the following pollutants.
Running Exhaust Emissions
(pounds/day)
PM10 PM10 PM10
CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires
50 mph 116.29 4.47 23.85 -- 0.50 0.50
Daily
Threshold 550 75 100 150
Based on 3,216 trips/day and average trip length of 7 miles, using EMFAC7G
Model provided by California Air Resources Board. Assumes catalytic light
autos at 75`F. * Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance
in determining the significance of a project and the need for an EIR.
"Trip Generation, Sixth Edition," Institute of Transportation Engineers, for category 210, Single -Family
Detached Housing.
SACity Clerk\Resolutions\EAAdden.WPD 1
The uuildout of the annexation area will not exceed any threshold for the
generation of moving emissions, as established by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District in determining the need for an EIR. The impacts to air
quality relating to chemical pollution are not expected to be significant.
111. c) The Coachella Valley is a non -attainment area for PM 10 (particulate matter of
10 microns or smaller). The annexation of the area will not have an impact on
PM 10 generation, in and of itself. The buildout of the area, however, which will
result in the construction of 336 residential units, has the potential to generate
dust, which could contribute to the PM 10 problem. In order to control PM 10,
the City has imposed standards and requirements on development to control
dust. The applicant will be required to submit a PM 10 Management Plan prior
to initiation of any earth moving activity at the site. In addition, the potential
impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the mitigation measures
below.
1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to
minimize exhaust emissions.
2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary
power poles to avoid on -site power generation during construction on any
portion of the annexation area.
3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit
opportunities.
4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on each parcel as construction
occurs.
5. Any portion of a parcel to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of
three feet prior to the onset of grading activities.
6. Watering of any parcel or other soil stabilization method shall be
employed on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity.
Portions of any parcel that are actively being graded shall be watered
regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall
be watered at the end of each work day.
7. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the
potential for wind erosion. As projects are proposed within the
annexation area, the Community Development Department shall impose
conditions of approval which require landscaping of parkways, open areas
and front yards as part of the first phase of any project.
8. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of
S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\EAAdden.WPD 2
construction -related dirt on approach routes.
9. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage
ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality
from buildout of the annexation area will not be significant.
IV. a) The annexation of the properties being considered for annexation will not have
an impact on biological resources. The buildout of the area, however, could
have a potentially significant impact on several sensitive species. The City's
General Plan identifies the annexation lands on the western boundary of the
Section as potential habitat for desert tortoise, Palm Springs pocket mouse, and
Palm Springs ground squirrel. In order to ensure that the impacts to these
species are less than significant, the following mitigation measure shall be
implemented:
1. Any parcel within the annexation area which proposes development shall
be required to perform focused biological species for all species shown
as potentially occurring in the area, according to the General Plan
biological resource exhibits in place at the time development is proposed
(currently exhibits 5.2 through 5.8, inclusive).
V. b) The annexation area and the City occur in an area of considerable archaeological
significance. The buildout of the annexation area could therefore result in
significant impacts without mitigation. In order to ensure that the impacts to
cultural resources are mitigated to a less than significant level, the following
mitigation measure shall be implemented:
1. Any parcel within the annexation area which proposes development shall
be required to submit Phase I cultural resource surveys performed
according to City standards in force at the time development occurs.
These surveys shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to
issuance of any permit for the proposed development.
VI. a) i) & i0
The proposed annexation area lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The lands
will be subject to significant ground movement in the event of a major
earthquake. When building begins to occur on the properties, structures will be
required to meet the City's standards for construction, which include Uniform
Building Code requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the
preparation of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the
submittal of grading plans for each project proposed. This requirement will
ensure that impacts from ground shaking are reduced to a less than significant
S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\EAAdden.WPD 3
level.
VI. b) The annexation area is subject to moderate wind erosion hazards. The City
Engineer will require the preparation of PM10 Management Plans for each
proposed development to control the potential for blowing dust from each
project. In addition, the mitigation measures listed under Air Quality, above, will
mitigate the potential impacts of soil erosion to a less than significant level.
VIII. b)
The annexation of the properties under consideration will have no impact on
water resources. As development occurs on these properties, each will be
required to implement the City's standards for water conserving plumbing
fixtures and on -site retention, which both aid in reducing the potential impacts
to groundwater. Each project will also meet the requirements of the City's
water -conserving landscaping ordinance. Finally, as new conservation measures
are developed, the City will have the ability to impose additional standards to
increase water conservation. These standards will reduce potential impacts to
a less than significant level.
XI. a) The annexation area occurs in an area with lower levels of traffic, which are not
expected to result in exceedances to the City's noise standards at buildout of
the General Plan. The ultimate buildout of the annexation area will have less
than significant impacts on the noise environment.
XI. c) The construction of individual projects within the annexation area will result in
temporary high noise levels which could impact residential development within
the Coral Mountain Specific Plan, since this area is already under construction.
In order to reduce these potential impacts, the following mitigation measures
shall be implemented:
1. All internal combustion equipment operating within 500 feet of any
occupied residential unit shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers
and air intake silencers.
2. All stationary construction equipment (e.g. generators and compressors)
shall be located as far from occupied dwelling units as possible.
3. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the La
Quinta Municipal Code.
XIII. a)
The annexation will not impact public services. Development of the lands within
the area, however, will have an impact on public services. The parcels will be
served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City contract. Site
S:\City Clerk\Resolutions\EAAdden.WPD 4
development on each parcel will generate property tax which will offset the
costs of added police and fire services.
Any development project within the annexation area will be required to
participate in the City's Impact Fee Program, which helps to offset roadway
improvement costs.
Each project will also be required to pay school fees in effect at the time of
development, to offset the potential impacts to the school system.
The ultimate buildout of the annexation area is not expected to have a
significant impact on municipal services or facilities.
XIV. a)
The ultimate buildout of the annexation area will result in an increase in
population which will have a need for recreational facilities. The generation of
property tax, and the General Plan policies in place to ensure that standards for
parkland acquisition are followed by the City as development occurs, will
mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level.
SACity Clerk\Resolutions\EAAdden.WPD 5
M
C
^O
•�
W
z
r
0
0
o
w
0
o
'
N
�
�
W
N
•,d
o
3
z
W
kn
o
C?
�
O
z
N
�
� W
o
w
z
O
�
m
N
zW
0-4 U
O
o, o
z
z
a
a
v
}+ C7
U O
COD
a
O
A
z
c�
�
w
o
z
O
�
h
a
M-4
O
d
a
d
0-4
z
0-4
�
o
Irl
W
N
H
o
O
N
to
cn
C!i
[�
z
o
U
Ww
a
cd
O0
O
N
z
o
c
W
w
W
F
Q
A
U�
zo
Q W
�w
ox
UU
y
c
-v
-C;
co
a
�
o
U
C]
c
.
p a'
On
-
a a
F- vz
v�
04
c
to
=
b
c
to
c
o
F
Ln
c
c
_
cz
c
r
c
_
cz
c
r_
==)
L i.'
a
C
U
=
U
U
U
U
O
U
O=
O W .
.�
o
o�
o
°
cn
c
'.
E :
E cz
U
U
U
m
U Ca m
c
c�
s_
H
•�
°
E
4
(00
i,,.i
??
vi
C.
O
cn
O
a w
a
O
ycz
C
O
'O
E U
Or
°
E
cz
v
It c
c
n
Q
z
C
N
N
U
c
3
"p —.
to it
�.y
co
—
• co
N
L
cz
O N
E
O
csa
a
a A
n N
U
cn
W
e
c
w >.
dW
� W
ox
UU
ow
ca
wc
cc
U
a�
c
V
z
fA
H
�
G.
O
L
0
a
a w
o
Oz
A
o(1)
U A
z
O
w
U
N
>l
d
u
CA 0
CA
o
E
0
0-4
W
E�
d
A
U m
Qw
U
a
W
O Z
U U
w
o
i
L �
U C/�
t3.
O
L
a
O
wz
c
�
as
o
zz
a>i
A
ag
a
t
E 2.
U Q
z
O
d
a
�
O
c
WW
�
a
L
i
C. O
W
Q
a
U m
Qw
U
a
� W
O�
UU
d
a
w
c
0
0
0
U
U
a>
U
c>
U
v
H
h
y
C
c
C
("�
O
O
O
H
U
U
U
C
C
C
�
A
7
A
�
A
IYr
O
Z
F
E
E
E
z Z
c
N
�
W
E
L
o
U
o
�
�
aW
c
o
V]
c
U
by
N