PCRES 2001-065t
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-065
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-421 PREPARED
FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-073, SPECIFIC
PLAN 84-004, AMENDMENT #4, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
29457, AMENDMENT #1, AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL FOR PARCEL MAP 20469 AND TRACT
MAPS 27840, 28343, 28640, 28912, 27952, 27835,
29306, 25154, 29457 AND 29283
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-421
APPLICANT: WATSON & WATSON ENGINEERING
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 8th of May, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 for General Plan Amendment 2000-073,
Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #4, Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1,
-- Amendment to Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840,
28343, 28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 located
between Washington and Jefferson Streets, south of Avenue 50, in the City of La
Quinta; and
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 2001-421)
and has determined that although the proposed General Plan Amendment 2000-073,
Specific Plan 84-004 (Amendment #4), Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1,
Amendment to Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840,
28343, 28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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 Planning Commission did find
the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said
Environmental Assessment:
The proposed General Plan Amendment 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-004
(Amendment #4), Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1, Amendment to
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343,
UUC
P:\GREG\PCReso RLQEA421 .wpd
28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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 2001-421.
2. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-004
(Amendment #4), Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1 Amendment to
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343,
28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-004
(Amendment #4), Tentative Tract Map 29457( Amendment #1), Amendment
to Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840,
28343, 28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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 Environmental Assessment.
4. The proposed General Plan Amendment 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-004 -
Amendment #4, Tentative Tract Map 29457 (Amendment #1), Amendment to
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343,
28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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 2001-073, Specific Plan 84-004,
Amendment #4, Tentative Tract Map 29457, Amendment #1, Amendment to
Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343,
28640, 28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283 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.
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 Planning Commission has considered the Environmental Assessment 2001-
P:\GREG\PCReso RLQEA421 .wpd U iJ
421 and the Environmental Assessment 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 Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment.
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of
Environmental Assessment 2001-421 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.
3. That Environmental Assessment 2001-421 reflects the independent judgement
of the City.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 8th day of May, 2001, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
_ I
STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman
/ City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
IY HEIJIMAN
munity Development Director
of La Quinta, California
UV�
P:\GREG\PC Reso RLQEA421 . wpd
4 Environmental Checklist Form
1 . Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2000-073, Specific Plan 84-
004, Amendment #4, Tentative Tract Map 29457,
Amendment #1, Amendment to Conditions of Approval for
Parcel Map 20469 and Tract Maps 27840, 28343, 28640,
28912, 27952, 27835, 29306, 25154, 29457 and 29283
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Greg Trousdell, 760-777-7125
4. Project Location: South side of Avenue 48, between Washington and
Jefferson Streets and to the north of Avenue 50. General
Plan Amendment is Citywide
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Watson & Christiansen Engineering
77682 Country Club Drive, Suite F2
Palm Desert, CA 92211
6. General Plan Designation: Low Density Residential, Golf and Tourist Commercial
7. Zoning: Low Density Residential, Golf Course and Tourist Commercial
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later
phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
General Plan Amendment to modify the current General Plan standard requiring
the undergrounding of utility lines. The Amendment would allow low voltage
lines on joint -use with 92kV lines to remain above ground. Specific Plan
amendment and Tentative Tract 29457 to add 5 acres to the existing project
site. Amendment to the Conditions of Approval on all other maps listed to allow
for overhead low voltage utility lines to remain on 92 Kv lines.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
Project is surrounded on all sides by streets. Beyond the streets:
_ North: Low Density Residential and Regional Commercial
South: Low Density Residential.
West: Low Density Residential and Golf Course
East: Riverside County lands, generally low density residential
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
P.TEQAchecklistEA 01-421.wpd 9
participation agreement.)
P.\CEQAchecklistEA 01-421.wpd o 10
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
Li 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
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.
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 FIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b)
have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier FIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposecj-upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Name
Date
CITY OF LA OUINTA
For
FE
FEW
FE
P:TEQAchecklistEA 01-421.wpd
u 11.
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 analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR,
or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in
Section 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.
g) 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.
P:\CEQAcheckbstEA 01-421.wpd
�11
Issues land Supporting Information Sources):
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving
AESTHETICS: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
(General Plan Exhibit CIR-5)
b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway? (General Plan EIR, page 5-12 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)
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?
(Master Environmental Assessment 5-29, 5-32)
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 non-agricultural 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)
Potentially
Potentially Significant
Less Than
Significant Unless
Significant No
Impact Mitigated
Impact Impact
X
X
X
3
X
Fq
Q
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
5 U 1
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?
(Specific Plan Project Descr.)
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people? (Specific Plan Project Descr.)
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, Exhibit 5-1)
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. 5-2 ff.)
c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands lincluding,
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. 5-2 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.
5-2 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 5-5)
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? (Historic/Archaeological Survey, CRM Tech,
March 2001)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
014
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
unique archaeological resources li.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)? (Historic/Archaeological Survey, CRM Tech,
March 2001)
c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or
site? (Lakebed Delineation Map)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? (Historic/Archaeological
Survey, CRM Tech, March 2001)
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, 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,
Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR, page 4-
30 ff.)
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
(General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
iv) Landslides? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
(General Plan EIR, page 4-30 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 EIR, page 4-30 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?
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? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-32)
a
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
A,)
VII. 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)
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? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 6-11)
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)
Vill. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements? (Master
Environmental Assessment 6-26, 6-27)
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, page 4-57 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, page 4-
57 ff.)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
o I G
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, page 4-57 ff.)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
to control? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 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 6-13)
g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental
Assessment 6-13)
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan
Project Description)
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?
(Master Environmental Assessment 2-11)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural communities conservation plan? (Master
Environmental Assessment 5-5)
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 5-29)
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 5-29)
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 EIR, p. 4-157 ff.)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General
Plan EIR, p. 4-157 ff.)
V
X
X
17
X
0
17
X
X
/4
X
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? (General Plan EIR, p. 4-157 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? (MEA, p. 6-15 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? (MEA, p. 6-15 ff.)
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, page 2-14)
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)
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, page 4-3 ff. )
Police protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. )
Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9 ff. )
Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan)
Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 ff. )
XIV. RECREATION:
X
X
X
D
M
X
X
X
X
X
X
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) X
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
10
018
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? X
(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)? (Application materials)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
(Application materials)
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? (Application materials)
d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)? (Application materials)
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:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General
Plan MEA, page 4-24 )
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, page 4-24 )
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, page 4-27)
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, page 4-
20)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
D
X
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD LI 19
1t
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,
page 4-20)
f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
needs? (General Plan MEA, page 4-28)
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 ANALYSES.
9
X
X
a
X
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)(3XD). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets.
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
Environmental Impact Report #90 was used the preparation of this report.
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.
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LO.WPD L
12 0`'
SOURCES:
Master Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 1992.
SCAQMD CEQA Handbook.
General Plan, City of La Quinta, 1992.
City of La Quinta Municipal Code
Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Five Acre Addition to Rancho La Quinta, CRM
Tech, March 2001
P:\GREG\EA cklstRancho LQ.WPD
13
U 1.
A_
Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2001-421
a) & c)
The General Plan Amendment proposes to allow utility lines which currently
occur on poles which carry 92 kV lines to remain on those poles, as the 92 kV
lines are not required to be under -grounded. The other utility lines could include
other lower -voltage electrical lines, telephone, cable television and similar
providers. The poles are generally located in or adjacent to the public right of
way of major roadways in the City. Many of these roadways are also designated
Image Corridors in the General Plan.
The electrical poles which carry 92 kV lines would remain under current General
Plan regulations, since they are too costly to underground, and are not required
to be undergrounded by City policy. The only change to the aesthetic
environment which would occur with the proposed amendment is that the
additional wires, which occur at a lesser height than the 92 kV lines, would
remain. The amendment also proposes the use of landscaping to help to lessen
the impact of these lines on the visual environment. Finally, since the greatest
visual impact of these lines is the poles on which they occur, not the utility lines
themselves, and since the poles would remain to carry the 92 kV lines
regardless of the General Plan Amendment, and since the addition of
landscaping would be included in the General Plan Amendment, the impact to
the aesthetics along Image Corridors is not expected to be significant.
Ill. c) & d)
The proposed Tract Map Amendment will create seven residential lots and one
retention basin lot on a five -acre parcel. The primary impacts to air quality from
these lots will be from mobile emitters. The trips generated by seven residential
lots will not be significant, nor will the trips generated for the maintenance of
the well site.
The Coachella Valley is a non -attainment area for PM10 (particulate matter of
10 microns or smaller). Dust will be created by the proposed project during
construction. In order to control PM10, the City has imposed standards and
requirements on development to control dust. These are integrated into the
following mitigation measures:
1. No earth moving activity shall be undertaken without the review and
approval of a PM10 Management Plan. The applicant shall submit same
to the City Engineer for review and approval.
2. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to --
minimize exhaust emissions.
3. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary
power poles to avoid on -site power generation.
P:\GREG\EA 421 Adden Rancho.WPD I l 22
4. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit
opportunities.
5. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site.
6. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of
three feet prior to the onset of grading activities.
7. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed
on an ongoing basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site.
Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered
regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall
be watered at the end of each work day.
8. All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion until the site is
constructed upon.
9. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of
construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site.
10. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage
ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
1 1 . All residences on the project site shall conform to energy use guidelines
in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code.
With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality
from the proposed project will not be significant. Moreover, improvements in
technology which are likely to reduce impacts, particularly from motor vehicles
or the transit route improvements in the future which may occur at the project
site are not included in the analysis. Further, the air quality impacts from the
proposed project fall within what was studied in the General Plan EIR. The City
determined at that time that air quality impacts associated with the buildout of
the City required a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which determined
that the impacts to air quality of development of the Plan would be cumulatively
significant when considered in conjunction with regional development, and that
the City would implement all feasible measures to reduce emissions within its
boundaries.
IV. a) The proposed project occurs within the fee payment area of the Coachella
Valley Fringed -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan (CVFTL HCP). The
proposed project also occurs in a blowsand hazard area. The project site may
P:\GREG\EA 421 Adden Rancho.WPD U ' 3
be habitat for the Coachella Valley Fringed -toed lizard. The California
Department of Fish and Game has declared that since it was not a signatory to
the CVFTL HCP, it is currently requiring mitigation for this species as required
by CESA. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the following mitigation
measure shall be implemented:
1 . Prior to the issuance of grading permits on the 5-acre addition to Specific
Plan 84-004, the project proponent shall complete, or cause to be
completed, a biological resource analysis on the subject property. Such
a study shall be undertaken by a qualified biologist, utilizing protocols
established for the Fringed -toed Lizard. The biological analysis shall
include a final report, to be submitted to the Community Development
Department for review and approval. The report shall include mitigation
measures, if required should the species be present on site.
V. b) A cultural resource survey and testing program was conducted for the subject
property'. The survey found no resources on the site. The project archaeologist
does recommend, however, that given the high occurrence of significant sites
in the City, it is possible that buried artifacts could be encountered during the
construction process. In order to mitigate this potential impact, the Historic
Preservation Commission recommends the following mitigation measure shall
be implemented:
1 . A qualified archaeological monitor shall be present during all earth moving
and grading activities. The monitor shall be empowered to stop or
redirect activities on the site should a resource be identified. A final
report shall be filed with the Community Development Department prior
to issuance of building permits for the first production residence in Tract
29457.
VI. a) i) & ii)
The proposed project lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as
with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the
event of a major earthquake. In order to protect the City from this hazard, the
City has adopted the Uniform Building Code, and the associated construction
requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the preparation
of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of
grading plans (please see below). This requirement will ensure that impacts from
ground failure are reduced to a less than significant level.
VI. b) & c)
The proposed project site is composed primarily of sandy soils, and is located
in a blowsand hazard area. Sandy soils must be properly compacted prior to
I Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey, prepared by CRM Tech, March 2001.
7
P:\GREG\EA 421 Adden Rancho.WPD t)�'-
construction to assure long-term stability. The City Engineer will be required to
review excavation and compaction plans for the proposed project site prior to
the issuance of grading permits. The following mitigation measure will be
required in order to reduce the impacts of unstable soils on the proposed site:
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall submit,
for review and approval by the City Engineer, a detailed, site specific soil
study, which shall include recommendations designed for the specific
structure(s) being constructed.
VI11. d) & f)
The proposed project, through the construction of residential units, will create
impermeable surfaces, which will change drainage patterns in a rain event. The
project site is located in Flood Zone A. The project will be required to meet the
City's standards for retention of the 100-year storm on -site, and to address on -
site flooding potential during a 100-year storm. This will control the amount of
runoff which exits the site during a storm. The site's drainage plan will be
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading
permits. This will ensure that impacts to the City's flood control system are
reduced to a less than significant level.
XI. a) & c)
The proposed Tract Map Amendment is located in an area which currently
meets the City's noise standards. The addition of seven housing units and a
well site are not expected to generate excessive noise levels, and the impacts
to surrounding existing sensitive receptors is not expected to be significant in
the long term. The construction of the well site and seven residences will
create short term noise impacts to the surrounding existing sensitive receptors.
In order to ensure that these impacts are mitigated, the following shall be
implemented:
1 . All construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the
La Quinta Municipal Code.
2. Construction staging areas shall be located as far from existing residential
development as possible.
3. Prior to the initiation of well drilling activities, the Coachella Valley Water
District shall complete the construction of a wall around the drilling site,
to reduce noise levels emanating from the drilling activity.
P:\GREG\EA 421 Adden Rancho.WPD U �. 0
E27
a
W
A
N
w
b
F
�
d
❑
C7
o
w
z
°
w
A
F
�
d
g
C
�
H
3
x
3
z
.n
Q
o
U
�
W
z
z
o
w
ai
U
O
U
O
H
�
°
C9
O
x
a
z
z
0
�
o
�
A
O
�
0
z
w
�
o
o
�
a
O
o
U
�M
00
N
by
❑
O.
>,
U
00
O
OCd
•,,,
O
cd
M
(/
r 0043
�
�
w
x
O
F
U
N
N
N
VJ
cad
Lcr
N
N
F
O
V
F
❑ _
UUj
a'
�Uj
�
�
�
O
c}y
C.7 O
6
C
d
c�a
N
N
Gx
z
F
%S
W
d
�
a
U
W
¢
F C
W
F
d
A
gN
U
aU
�x
U
U
d
v
�
W
F
a N
7
z°
U
F
o
b
Q
a
� y
R
°
W
� O
�
oz
Q
E a
U A
G
z
O
o
F
75
�
U
\
\�
§�
/(
u=
\
/
\
\\\\\
\
_to
\\k
\
\}\
\}\\
cz
e
o/
\k
)
3
\[{
3
\
s
\®
&®
za§
f
z
>
[
�
a
\
�
R
2&
[
{
to
\
\
cr
\
\
;
¢
\
�
K
j
\�
;q
\�
§
u
\
\
\
/
[
\\
)/
ƒ
2
{y
)
\�
u2
[
§
\
\rA
\
\
°
\�
�
••
�
»
c
c
t
\
{
2
}27
\\
\�
e)
\�
)
4
2
u
#\§
{{g
G#@
�
\
E
�
e
\
j
\
\/
§\
23
§
�z
\
�\
}
2$
){
94
\
[ §
/
&
\
7
2
\\
j
\�
\�
)
�
\\
/
\
/)
bJD
\�\\+
2\K&%
}7
\
En
&& &
C6 c
§
\z
)
9
(/
/
&/ �
\
§
4
/( \
\
\
U2§
A
\
\�
)�
&
\§
]
4
e
`
)\
(
/&
//
\/
)(
/K
2
)
r
»
u
f
=
�
;
\I
\
w
j
f
§§
/
;
�
\\(
\
\
§°
\�
2
4
\ \
k
/
7
) /
e
\
cz
to
\
\
§
(
2\
2
®w
(
\ \
\2
2
\
\
°
cr
}
\\ \
&
)
2
\
\
\
U�