EA 2006-582 Villa Capri - Final EIR (TPM 35088; SDP 2006-875)TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
Response to Comments on Draft EIR
FINAL EIR
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
ON
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR
VILLA CAPRI (SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 06-875 AND TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 35088
March 6, 2009
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 200712009
AGENCY COMMENTS/RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
The Response to Comments on the Draft EIR for the Villa Capri project has been prepared in
accordance with Section 15088, 15089 and 15132 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines. The following agencies and interested parties have commented on the Draft
EIR. Please note that Section I contains verbatim comments from agencies and other interested
parties, and subsequent responses. Section II contains the full text of commenting agency
correspondence.
SECTION is
AGENCIES/PARTIES
PAGE
A.
Riverside County Fire Department
4
B.
Time Warner Cable
7
C.
Coachella Valley Water District
8
D.
Native American Heritage Commission
9
E.
Riverside County Transportation Department
11
F.
The Robert Mayer Corporation
12
G.
Department of Toxic Substances Control
16
H.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
19
SECTION II:
A. Riverside County Fire Department
B. Time Warner Cable
C. Coachella Valley Water District
D. Native American Heritage Commission
E. Riverside County Transportation Department
F. The Robert Mayer Corporation
G. Department of Toxic Substances Control
H. California Regional Water Quality Control Board
2
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
Response to Comments on Draft EIR
SECTION I
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
The following verbatim comments were received on the Draft EIR transmitted to various public
agencies and interested parties. These comments concern aspects of the Draft EIR, including
clarification of information, adequacy of analysis, and similar issues. Related comments may
occasionally be combined to allow one response to address these related questions. The following
responses have been prepared to address issues raised in the agency/interested party comments.
3
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
Response to Comments on Draft EIR
A. Riverside County Fire Department
A.I. Comment: The proposed project will have a cumulative adverse impact on the Fire
Department's ability to provide an acceptable level of service. These impacts
include an increased number of emergency and public service calls due to the
increased presence of structures and population. The proponents/developers shall
participate in the Development Impact Fee Program as adopted by the City of La
Quinta to mitigate a portion of these impacts. This will provide funding for capital
improvements such as land, equipment purchases and fire station construction.
The Fire Department reserves the right to negotiate developer agreements
associated with the development of land and/or construction of fire facilities to
meet service demands through the regional integrated fire protection response
system.
Mitigation measures, as defined by the City of La Quinta, should be considered in
order to help reduce these impacts to a level below significance. Examples of
mitigation measures might include:
• Developer participation in land acquisition and fire facility construction;
• Equipment upgrade and/or purchase;
• Participation in a fire mitigation fee program which would allow one-time
capitol (sic) development;
• Participation in the cost of adding additional personnel.
A.I. Response: As described in the EIR, the proposed project will not have a significant impact
on fire services. The project is located less than one mile from existing fire station
#93, which will directly serve the project. The project will be required to pay
Development Impact Fees, which include a component for the construction of fire
facilities commensurate with the impact each project has on these facilities. Since
the Development Impact Fee is based on a rational nexus analysis of the demand
of future development and the cost of providing facilities, the Development
Impact Fee will fully mitigate the impacts associated with fire facilities and
equipment.
As regards personnel needs, the City funds Fire Department personnel through its
General Fund. General Fund revenues include property and sales tax. The
proposed project will generate both of these taxes, and as is typical of most
commercial development, is expected to positively impact the General Fund.
Further, the provision of fire services to commercial projects generally has a
lower demand than residential development. Therefore, it is expected that the
proposed project's contributions to the General Fund will adequately fiend fire
personnel needs generated by the project. No mitigation measures are necessary,
as the impact associated with fire services will not be significant.
A.2 Comment: Costs necessary to maintain the increased level of service may be at least partially
offset by taxes acquired by the new construction; however additional funding
sources may have to be identified to cover any shortfalls.
4
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
Response to Comments on Draft EIR
A.2. Response: See response to comment A.1.
A.3. Comment: All water mains and fire hydrants providing required fire flows shall be
constructed in accordance with the appropriate sections of Riverside County
Ordinance No. 460 and/or No. 787, subject to review and approval by the
Riverside County Fire Department.
A.3. Response: Comment noted. As part of the City's standard permitting procedure, the Fire
Department will review all construction plans related to the proposed project as
they are submitted, and will regulate fire flow and hydrant locations consistent
with its standards.
A.4. Comment: The proposed project land use would be a Category I — Heavy Urban. The 3
nearest Fire Stations that would respond to an incident are:
The attached map identifies the Project Areas (sic) (Fred Waring Dr. cross of
Washington St.)
The 3 nearest Fire stations that would respond to an incident in the Proposed
project Area:)
RCO Station #93, La Quinta North, 44-555 Adams Street, La Quinta, CA
RCO Station #55, Indian Wells, 44-900 El Dorado Dr., Indian Wells, CA
RCO Station #81, North Bermuda Dunes, 37-955 Washington St., Palm Desert,
CA
All the above mentioned RCO Fire Stations are staffed frill -time, 24 hours/7 days
a week, with a minimum 3 person crew, including Paramedics, operating "Type -
1" structural fire fighting apparatus.
A.4. Response: Comment noted.
A.S. Comment: Based on the adopted Riverside County Fire Protection Master Plan, the Category
I — Heavy Urban specifies that a frill alarm assignment be operating on the fire
ground within ten minutes and the fire station to be located within 1.5 miles. The
primary station serving this area would be within the 1.5 mile objective. From the
above listed fire stations, the first unit should arrive within 2-3 minutes after
dispatch, the second within 3-4 minutes and the third between 4-5 minutes. These
times are approximate and meet the Heavy Urban Land Use protection goals.
A.S. Response: Comment noted.
5
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
onse to Comments on Draft EIR
A.6. Comment: Current minimum staffing levels of 3 persons per responding unit presently meet
existing demands. As with any additional construction within a response area, a
"cumulative" increase in requests for service will add to the Fire Department's
ability to provide adequate service.
A.6. Response: Comment noted. See response to comment A.1.
A.7. Comment: All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as described
in Section 1503 of the California Building Code.
A.7. Response: Comment noted.
A.8. Comment: Please delete the following under the Fire Protection Section
1. Existing Conditions
Riverside County holds that the fire department should maintain 500
square feet of fire station space for each 1,000 residents.
A.8. Response: Comment noted. The sentence is hereby deleted.
A.9. Comment: Provide access to all fire hydrants along all access routes within the project
area and provide and maintain fire department vehicle access roads both on-site
and off-site within the project boundary.
Construction activities could result in traffic delays that could affect the ability of
fare and emergency service units to meet response time goals within the project
area.
Temporary road closures, lane closures, or detour routes may impair response
times by the fare department and other emergency service providers,
Non fare related medical emergencies could temporary (sic) increase within (sic)
the presence of construction workers and heavy machinery during construction of
the project.
Mitigation measures should be considered in order to help reduce these impacts
to a level below significance.
The California Fire Code outlines fire protection standards for the safety, health,
and welfare of the public. These standards will be enforced by the Fire Chief.
A.9. Response: Comments noted. Please see response to comment A.I. The City requires the
preparation and approval of traffic management plans for all construction
projects. These management plans include the preservation of traffic lanes to the
greatest extent possible. The City, in its processing of the encroachment permits
necessary for road improvements, coordinates with other affected agencies,
including the Fire Department, as necessary to result in minimum impacts to those
agencies.
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
e to Comments on Draft EIR
B. Time Warner Cable
B.I. Comment: I have reviewed your project area and found that we do have conflict in the area.
However, we have been in close contact with Leonard R. St. Sauver, Assistance
(sic) Engineer Il. It has been established equipment and system will have to be
moved.
B.1. Response: Comment noted. The project proponent will be required to coordinate with all
utilities to assure that no conflicts occur between the proposed project and
existing facilities.
7
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
Response to Comments on Draft EIR
C. Coachella Valley Water District
C.I. Comment: Page III -47, Groundwater Replenishment — Please revise the last sentence of the
paragraph to read: "CVWD has also started a similar program in the southern
portion of the Coachella Valley near Lake Cahuilla and in the Martinez Canyon
area, southeast of La Quinta."
C.l. Response: Comment noted. The referenced sentence is hereby amended.
C.2. Comment: Page III -73, Wastewater Collection and Treatment, Existing Conditions — Please
revise the next to last sentence in the last paragraph to read: "WRP-4 is currently
able to process a maximum of 9.9 million gallons per day (mgd)."
C.2. Response: Comment noted. The referenced sentence is hereby amended.
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
to Comments on Draft EIR
D. Native American Heritage Commission
D.1. Comment: -,/ Contact the appropriate California Historic Resources Information Center
(CHRIS). The record search will determine:
• If a part or the entire APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources.
• If any known cultural resources have already been recorded in or adjacent to
the APE.
• If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located
in the APE.
• If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural
resources are present.
-✓ If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the
preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and recommendations of
the records search and field survey.
• The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation
measurers should be submitted immediately to the planning department. All
information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and
associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum,
and not be made available for public disclosure.
• The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has
been completed to the appropriate regional archaeological Information Center,
V The Native American Heritage Commission (HAHC) performed:
• A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search of the project area of potential effect
(APE): The results: No known Native American Cultural Resources were
identified within one-half mile of the area of Dotential effect (APE). However
the NAHC SLF is not exhaustive and local tribal contacts should be consulted
from the attached list and the there (sic) are Native American cultural
resources in close proximity.
• The NAHC advises the use of Native American Monitors to ensure proper
identification and care given cultural resources that may be discovered. The
NAHC recommends that contact be made with Native American contacts on
the attached list to get their input on potential project impact, particularly the
contacts of the on the list.
D.I. Response: Comment noted. A Cultural Resources Technical Report was prepared for the
project. As part of the research procedures, the records and the electronic
databases were reviewed. Included in this review, among others, was the
California Historical Resources Information System. As part of the research
procedures for the Cultural Resources Technical Report for the project, the Native
American Heritage Commission was contacted and a sacred lands records search
was completed and no Native American cultural resources were identified in the
immediate project area.
E
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
onse to Comments on Draft EIR
D.2. Comment: V Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their
subsurface existence.
• Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the
identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archeological
resources, per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) § 15064.5 (f). In
areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a
culturally affiliated Native American, with knowledge in cultural resources,
should monitor all ground -disturbing activities.
• Again, a culturally -affiliated Native American tribe may be the only source of
information about a Sacred Site/Native American cultural resource.
• Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the
disposition of recovered artifacts, in consultation with culturally affiliated
Native Americans,
D.2. Response: Comment noted. The proposed project shall comply with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mitigation measures included in the EIR
require that a qualified archeologist be present to monitor any earth -moving
activities. Reporting is a part of the mitigation measure. .
D.3. Comment: \/ Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American
human remains or unmarked cemeteries in their mitigation plans.
• CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5 (d) require the lead agency to work with
the Native Americans identified by this Commission if the initial Study
identifies the presence or likely presence of native American human remains
within the APE. CEQA Guidelines provide for agreements with Native
American, identified by the NAHC, to assure the appropriate and dignified
treatment of Native American human remains and any associated grave liens.
V Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097.98 and Sec.
§15064.5 (d) of the CEQA guidelines mandate procedures to be followed in the
event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a
dedicated cemetery.
D.3. Response: Comment noted, 'The proposed project shall comply with applicable Health and
Safety Codes, Public Resource Codes and CEQA.
DA. Comment: -,/Lead agencies should consider avoidance, as defined in § 15370 of the CEQA
Guidelines, when significant cultural resources are discovered during the course
of project planning.
DA. Response: Comment noted. In compliance with CEQA, the proposed project shall consider
avoidance if significant cultural resources are discovered during project
development.
to
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
to Comments on Draft EIR
E. Riverside County Transportation Department
E.1. Comment: While the Transportation Department is concerned about the traffic impacts of the
project on Washington Street and at the intersection of Washington Street/Hovley
Lane, the Department concurs with the conclusions presented in the DEIR that
mitigation measures in the form of lane additions along Washington Street and at
the intersection would be infeasible.
E.1. Response: Comment noted.
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
se to Comments on Draft EIR
F. The Robert Mayer Corporation
F.1. Comment: Mitigation Measure Number 3 under "Air Quality" ("MM3") provides that "all
structures within the proposed project shall demonstrate energy efficiency which
exceeds the standards of Title 24 of the Uniform Building Code by 20%." [EIR
page III -21.1 The EIR fails, however, to provide any analysis which would
document the need, effectiveness or feasibility of this measure. In reviewing this
requirement with the Project architects and construction staff, we have been
advised that this requirement is not economically feasible within current
technology.
F.1. Response: The EIR clearly describes on page III -20 that the project will generate 7,458
metric tons annually of CO2e in greenhouse gas emissions. The EIR also
includes, in Appendix H, the tables from which this data was derived. As the site
is vacant, the proposed project will create 7,458 metric tons of new CO2e
emissions. The project will therefore increase greenhouse gases. In accordance
with the State's AB 32 requirements, the City is required to reduce its greenhouse
gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.
F.2. Comment: CEQA mitigation measures must be designed to reduce project impacts to a level
of being less than significant. MM3 is designed to reduce impacts to air quality
and climate change from the Project's operation. Yet the EIR's analysis shows
that the impacts on air quality and climate change from the operation of the
structures on the Project site is already negligible. Specifically, the EIR, at page
III -20 describes the Project's impacts on climate change by stating:
"The project's total GHG emissions at buildout represent .001 % of
California's 2004 GHG emissions and 0,0001% of the nations 2004 GHG
emissions. The proposed project does not interfere with any of the goals
set forth in AB 32 and is therefore not expected to have significant
impacts on climate change and global warming due to the emission of
greenhouse gases daring project construction or operation. "
In terms of Air Quality, the EIR describes the impacts from the Project's
operation on page III -18 by stating:
"The Air Quality Study, prepared by Endo Engineering, shows that
operational emissions from stationary sources are negligible for all
criteria pollutants except for ROG [reactive organic gases]. At buildout
the project would contribute 3.29 pounds per day of ROG, which is well
below the daily threshold of 75 pounds per day.
Operational emissions from stationary sources at buildout of the
proposed project are projected to have less than significant impacts on air
duality as emission levels are well below established thresholds."
12
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
Response to Comments on Draft EIR
It is clear, therefore, from the detailed analysis contained in the EIR that MM3 is
not necessary to mitigate the Project's impacts to air quality or climate change
and therefore MM3 lacks the essential nexus to the Project's impacts required
under well settled Constitutional principals (sic). The impact on the Project from
MM3 is clearly disproportionate to the Project's impact on either air quality or
climate change, and therefore this mitigation measure fails the Constitutionally
required "proportionality" test, and the mitigation measure should, therefore, be
stricken.
F.2. Response: The analysis of air quality impacts is divided in the EIR according to types of
emissions. The traditional emissions, for which South Coast Air Quality
Management District has issued thresholds, is described separately, both in the
EIR (pages III -15 to III -19) and in the air quality study. However, the air quality
study (Appendix C) did not include an analysis of greenhouse gases. Since this
analysis is now required under CEQA, the greenhouse gas analysis was completed
separately (Appendix H). The results of the analysis are summarized in the EIR,
page III -20, separately from the traditional emissions. In order to achieve the
required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, every jurisdiction must
implement greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategies. The mitigation measure
is appropriate insofar as it is directed specifically to greenhouse gas emissions.
Although no thresholds are yet available for greenhouse gas emissions, a
reduction of 20% is reasonable to reduce the project's impacts on greenhouse
gases, since all the project's greenhouse gas emissions will exceed the City's
1990 greenhouse gas levels, as the site has heretofore not generated greenhouse
gases.
F.3. Comment: The requirement to exceed Title 24 energy efficiency requirements by 20% is not
required by any current federal, state or city statute or regulation. This
requirement is not imposed on a city-wide basis, and therefore its imposition on
this Project places this property at an unfair disadvantage, as compared to other
similarly situated properties in the City. There is nothing unique about this
Project which would warrant MM3 while similar measures are not warranted in
all other projects in the City. In addition to lacking the nexus and proportionality
required by constitutional law principals (sic), MM3 burdens this Project unfairly
in a way that is unique in this City, and MM3 should therefore be stricken.
F.3. Response: The City has a responsibility to meet the State's AB 32 mandates wherever
possible, and through the EIR process, has identified a credible and feasible
mitigation measure to help meet these requirements. It would be irresponsible for
the City to ignore AB 32 requirements when a project is proposed on a vacant site
which will clearly not meet 1990 greenhouse gas emission levels.
In recognition of possible alternative interpretation and potential impracticality of
enforcing MM3 as currently worded, MM3 is revised as follows:
13
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
e to Comments on Draft EIR
"Unless determined to be an unreasonable hardship by the City
Planning Director, all structures shall exceed the minimum
standards set forth in the 2007 California Energy Code (Title 24,
Part 6) by 20%. If it is determined by the Planning Director that
compliance with this measure creates an unreasonable hardship,
the measure may be reduced to the highest level determined
feasible by the Planning Director but in no case shall it be reduced
below the minimum standard set forth by the California Energy
Code in effect at the time of building permit submittal."
F.4. Comment: The wording of MM3 specifically references the need to exceed Title 24 energy
efficiency standards by 20%. If, in the future, Title 24 is amended to increase its
energy efficiency standards, with the wording of MM3, the Project would be
required to not only meet the new standards but to exceed them by 20%. Given
that the 20% requirement has already made the Project economically infeasible,
such an increase would seal its fate.
We recognize that MM3 is designed to encourage energy efficient design, and we
concur that energy efficient design is an important part of any project today. In
fact, we believe that the marketplace will increasingly demand energy efficient
design. However, selecting an arbitrary 20% margin for exceeding Title 24
standards without determining the feasibility of such a requirement, will not, with
current technology result in an energy efficient project, it will result in no project.
FA. Response: See response F.3., above. The revised mitigation measure language continues to
encourage an energy efficient design that reduces the generation of greenhouse
gas emissions from the project while also acknowledging flexibility should an
unreasonable hardship be determined. Additionally, should the project be delayed,
the revised mitigation measure language acknowledges that the Title 24 standard
may change and ensures that the project will at a minimum comply with the
standard set forth at the time of building permit submittal. As green technologies
continue to improve, the cost to incorporate energy efficient measures into the
construction process is diminishing, and thus the feasibility of the reductions will
increase. The City's responsibility remains to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to
meet the requirements of State law.
F.5. Comment: The City's concern and commitment to energy efficient design is adequately
protected by Mitigation Measure Number 2 under Air Quality ("MM2"), which
requires that the Project:
"Utilize sustainable building practices such as Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building standards for
building construction to the greatest extent possible." [EIR, page III -21.1
Unlike MM3, MM2 assures energy efficient design without making the Project
infeasible. It also requires Project design to evolve with improvements in energy
efficiency technologies.
14
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
to Comments on Draft EIR
F.5. Response: Mitigation measure #2 does not require the implementation of any specific
reduction, and therefore does not have a direct effect on the project's greenhouse
gas emissions. Mitigation measure #3, however, is designed to show a measurable
improvement in the project's direct impact on the environment, and as such is
appropriate.
F. 6. Comment: Based on the foregoing, we would request that MM3 be stricken, or if the City
intends to adopt energy efficiency standards in the future, to protect its ability to
impose those standards, we would suggest that MM3 be modified to read as
follows:
"Each structure within the proposed project shall comply with the city-
wide energy efficiency standards in effect for development in the City at the time
that building permits for that structure are issued. "
F.6. Response: Comment noted. The revised language for mitigation measure #3 is appropriate to
meet its responsibilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels. In the
absence of thresholds, a reduction of 20% is appropriate for this project, since the
project will be increasing greenhouse gases in the City by 7,458 metric tons per
year.
15
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
Response to Comments on Draft EIR
G. Department of Toxic Substances Control
G.1. Comment: The EIR should evaluate whether conditions within the project area may pose a
threat to human health or the environment. Following are the databases of some of
the regulatory agencies:
• National Priorities List (NPL): A list maintained by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA).
• Envirostor (formerly CalSites): A Database primarily used by the
California Department of Toxic Substance Control, accessible through
DTSC's website (see below).
• Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS): A
database of RCRA facilities that is maintained by the U.S. EPA.
• Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS): A database of CERCLA sites that is
maintained by the U.S. EPA.
• Solid Waste Information System (SWIS): A database provided by the
California Integrated Waste Management Board which consists of both
open as well as closed and inactive solid waste disposal facilities and
transfer stations.
• Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) / Spills, Leaks,
Investigations and Cleanups (SLIC): A list that is maintained by Regional
Water Quality Control Boards.
• Local Counties and Cities maintain lists for hazardous substances cleanup
sites and leaking underground storage tanks.
• The United States Army Corps of Engineers, 91 Wilshire Boulevard, Los
Angeles, California, 900t7, (213) 452-3908, maintains a list of Formerly
Used Defense Sites (FUDS).
The EIR should identify the mechanism to initiate any required investigation
and/or remediation for any site that may be contaminated, and the government
agency to provide appropriate regulatory oversight. If necessary, DTSC would
require oversight an agreement in order to review such document.
Any environmental investigation, sampling and/or remediation for a site should
be conducted under a Work plan approved and overseen by a regulatory agency
that has jurisdiction to oversee hazardous substance cleanup. The findings of any
investigation, including any Phase I or II Environmental Site Assessment
Investigation should be summarized in the document. All Sampling results in
which hazardous substances were found above regulatory standards should be
clearly summarized in a table. All closure, certification or remediation approval
reports by regulatory agencies should be included in the EIR.
OM
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
nse to Comments on Draft EIR
G.I. Response: As stated on page III -42 of the EIR, the project site does not appear on state
databases of contaminated sites, and any hazardous material spill onsite or in the
project vicinity would be cleaned up the Riverside County Fire Department's
hazardous waste team.
As stated on page III -43 of the EIR, the Riverside County Department of
Environmental Health and the Fire Department have regulations in place, and a
responsibility to monitor, for commercial use and sale of hazardous materials.
The Solid Waste Management discussion on page III -71 of the EIR references the
Integrated Waste Management Board as the source for information about area
landfill permits and capacities, as well as the Edom Hill transfer station.
G.2. Comment: If buildings, other structures, asphalt, or concrete -paved surface areas are being
planned to be demolished, an investigation should also be conducted for the
presence of other hazardous chemical, mercury, and asbestos containing materials
(ACM's). If other hazardous chemicals, leas -based paint (LBP) or products,
mercury or ACM's are identified, proper precautions should be taken during
demolition activities. Additionally, the contaminants should be remediated in
compliance with California regulations and policies.
G.2. Response: Comment noted. The project site is vacant and no previous development is known
to have occurred onsite. Therefore, the project does not require demolition of any
kind.
G.3. Comment: Future project construction may require soil excavation or filling in certain areas.
Sampling maybe required. If soil is contaminated, it must be properly disposed
and not simply placed in another location onsite. Land Disposal Restriction
(LDR's) may be applicable to such soils. Also, if the project proposes to import
soils to backfill the areas excavated, sampling should be conducted to ensure that
the imported soil is free of contamination.
G.3. Response: Comment noted. See response to G.2. above. In addition, as stated in the
Geotechnical Investigation, found in Appendix G of the EIR, the contractor shall
notify the Soil Engineer at least 48 hours in advance of importing soils in order to
provide sufficient time for the evaluation of proposed import materials.
GA. Comment: Human health and the environment of sensitive receptors should be protected
during the construction or demolition activities. If necessary, a health risk
assessment overseen and approved by the appropriate government agency should
be conducted by a qualified health risk assessor to determine if there are, have
been, or will be, any releases of hazardous materials that may pose a risk to
human health or the environment.
17
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
to Comments on Draft EIR
GA. Response: Comment noted. See response to G.2. above. In addition, as stated on page III -43
of the EIR, the Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and the
Fire Department have regulations in place that are designed to assure proper
transport, use, and storage of hazardous materials in order to prevent the release
or exposure of such substances to humans or the environment.
G.5. Comment: If it is determined that hazardous wastes are, or will be, generated by the proposed
operations, the wastes must be managed in accordance with the California
Hazardous Waste Control Law (California Health and Safety Code, Division 20,
chapter 6.5) and the Hazardous Waste Control Regulations (California Code of
Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5). If it is determined that hazardous wastes will
be generated, the facility should also obtain a United States Environmental
Protection Agency Identification Number by contacting (800) 618-6942. Certain
hazardous waste treatment processes or hazardous material handling, storage, or
use may require authorization from the local Certified Unified Program Agency
(CUPA). Information about the requirement for authorization can be obtained by
contacting your local CUPA.
G.5. Response: Comment noted. As stated on page III -42 of the EIR, the regulation of hazardous
materials at the project site is under the supervision of the Southern California
Hazardous Waste Management Authority (SCHWMA), and the County of
Riverside takes responsibility for the management, treatment and disposal of
hazardous wastes within the City of La Quinta. Riverside County manages
hazardous materials in accordance with the California Hazardous Waste Control
Law and the Hazardous Waste Control Regulations. Development on the site will
be subject to all applicable regulations governing the management, treatment and
disposal of hazardous wastes.
G.6. Comment: If the project area was used for agriculture, livestock or related activities, onsite
soils and groundwater might contain pesticides, agricultural chemical, organic
waste or other related residue. Proper investigation, and remedial actions, if
necessary, should be conducted under the oversight of and approved by a
government agency in the project area prior to construction of the project.
G.6. Response: Comment noted. As noted in response G.2. above, the project site is vacant, and
there is no evidence that any agriculture, livestock or related activities were ever
conducted on the project site.
G.7. Comment: In future CEQA documents, please provide the contact person's title and e-mail
address.
G.7. Response: The contact person, Stan Sawa, and his title and contact information were
provided in Section I of the EIR.
18
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
e to Comments on Draft EIR
H. California Regional Water Quality Control Board
H.I. Comment: A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for storm
water discharges associated with construction activities is required for projects
disturbing one or more acres. An NPDES storm water permit is also required for
projects that are part of a common plan and disturb more than one or more acres.
H.I. Response: Section III -G. Hydrology and Water Quality of the EIR identifies the
requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Further, on
page III -52 of the impacts discussion the EIR states "the proposed project will be
required to implement NPDES standards during construction and operation."
IE
TN/City of La Quinta
Villa Capri Final EIR
Response to Comments on Draft EIR
SECTION II
COMMENT LETTERS
The following comment letters were received on the Draft EIR transmitted to various public
agencies and interested parties. Comments restated in Section I are bracketed in this section
and correspond to the comment numbers in Section I.
20
Jan -29-2009 05:02 PM RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE 9519406295
John R. Hawkins
Fire Chief
Proudly serving the
unincorporated
areas of Ri mide
County and the
Cities of',
Banning
Beaumont
O
Calimesa
Canyon Lake
O
Coachella
4
Desert Hot Springs
Indian Wells
Indio
O
Lake Elsinore
4
La Quinta
Moreno Valley
Palm Desart
4
Perris
Rancho Mirage
O
San Jscinto
Temecula
Board of Supervisors
Bob Bugler,
Distdot I
John Tavagliona,
District 2
Jof1`stone,
District 3
Roy Wilson,
District 4
Marion Ashtay,
District 3
2300 Markat
January 29, 2.009
City of La Quinta
Planning Departm
Stan Sawa, Princi,
78-495 Calle Tam
La Quiata, CA 92
Re: La Quinta
TPM 35088
With respect to the
has the following c
The proposed pr
ability to provide
number of emerl
structures and pc
Development Im
pardon of these
land, equipment
the right to nego
and/or construct;
integrated fire p1
Mitigation measure
to help reduce these
measures might inc
Developer parts
• Equipment upg
• Participation in
improvements
development.
• Participation in
RIVERSIDE COL NTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
in cooperation with the
allfomia Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
1" FL Suite 150 • Riverside, Calffomis 92601 . (951) 853.4777 ..Fax (808) 856-4886
Planner
Environmental Impact Report, Development Permit 06.875,
project (DER), the Riverside County Fire Department
,t will have a cumulative adverse impact on the Fire Department's
acceptable level of service. These impacts include an increased
.y and public service calls due to the increased presence of
ation. The proponents/developers shall participate in the
,t Fee Program as adopted by the City of La Quinta to mitigate a
acts, This will provide funding for capital improvements such as
chasesand fire station conatruction. Tho Fixe Department reserves
developer agreements associated with the development of land
of fire facilities to meet service demands through the regional
response system.
as defined by the City of La Quinta, should be considered in order
impacts to a level below significance. Examples of mitigation
patioa in land acquisition and,fire facility construction;
de and/or purchase;
fire mitigation fee program which would allow onetime capitol
:h as land and equipment purchases, and construction
cost of adding additional personnel.
Al
Jan -292009 05:03.PM RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE 9.519406295
Costs necessary to maintain the increased level of service may be at least partially offset by taxes A2
acquired by the new constructs n; however additional funding sources may have to be identified to
cover any shortfalls.
All water mains and fire hydr is providing required fire flows shall be canstructed in accordance
with the appropriate sections o Riverside County Ordinance No. 460 and/or No. 787, subject to . A 3
review and approval by the Riv nside County Fire Department.
The proposed project land use ould be a Category I — Heavy Urban, The 3 nearest Fire Statior
that would respond to an incide it are.
The attached map identifies the Project Areas (Fred Waring Dr. cross of Washington St.)
T'he 3 nearest Kra Stations that would respond to an incident In the Proposed project Area:)
RCO Station # 93, La Quints orth, 44-555 Adams Street, La Quinta, CA
RCO Station # 55, Indian
RCO Station # 81, North Bern
All the above mentioned RCO i
minimum 3 person crew, includ
apparatus.
Based on the adopted Riverside
specifies that a full alarm assign
station to be located within 1.5
axile objective, From the above
after dispatch, the second withv
approximate and meet the Heav
Current minimum staffing level
As with any additional construe
service will add to the Fire Dep
All buildings shall be construct
of the California Building Code
Please delete the following
44-900 El Dorado Dr., Indian Walls, CA
L Dunes, 37-955 Washington St., Palm Desert, CA
Stations are staffed full-time, 24 hours/7 days a week, with
Paramedics, operating "Type -l" structural fire fighting
County Fire Protection Master Plan, the Category I — Heavy Urban
went be operating on the fire ground within ten minutes and the tyre
riles. The primary station serving this area would be within the 1.5
listed fire stations, the fust unit should arrive within 2.3 minutes
3-4 minutes and the third between 4-5 minutes. These times are
y Urban Land Use protection goals.
3 of 3 persons per responding unit presently meet existing demands.
tion within a response area, a "cumulative" increase in requests for
=eat's ability to provide adequate service.
;d with fire retardant roofing material as described in Section 1503
the Fire Protection Section
.l. Existing Condition
Riverstdi Coun4v holds that the,l`ire department should maintain 500
square f et of, fire station space for each 1, 000 residents,
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
Jan -29-2009 05:03 PM RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE 9519406295
The following cofnmei#s reflect the construction phase of the projee4
Provide access to all fire hydra is along all access routes within the project area and provide
and maintain fire department 1 chicle access roads both on-site and off- site within the project
boundary.
Construction activities could re ult in traffic delays that could affect the ability of fire and
emergency service units to meef response time goals within the project area.
Temporary road closures, lanersarvice
osures, or detour routes may impair response times by the fire
ergen
department and other emproviders.
Non, fire related medical emerg ncies could temporary increase within the presence of construction
workers and heavy machinery uring construction of the project,
Mitigation measures should be considered in order to help reduce these impacts to a level below
significance,
The California Fire Code outlos fire protection standards for the safety, health, and welfare of the
public. These standards will b enforced by the Fire Chief.
If you have my questions feel
S' relyq,�
Trion Nauman, Captain
Strategic Planning Division
Riverside County Fire Depi
(951) 940-6349
to contact me.
A9
Jan 21 09 09:39a Time Warner Cable
Jtsn F7 . F91� Ti :�R1U2 T �
f : I ` �f ! r' VFFIfS i�� 1!`. '! ' 4 9li K� pp� 7 4.UdA:
CA 13 L
January 20, 2009
City of La Quinta
City Planning Department
P,a. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92247-1504
ATTN: Mr. Stan Sawa
RE: Villa Capri Commercial Project — Site Development Permit 06-875 and
Tentative Parcel Map 35088
To Mr. Sawa,
I have reviewed your project area and found that we do have conflict in the
area. However, we have been in close contact with Leonard R. St, Sauver, B 1
Assistance Engineer II. It has been established equipment and system will have
to be moved,
If you have any further questions or concerns please contact Bob Locts%fWC
Coordinator for that area, (760) 674-5540.
Sincerely,
A)V
4L da Johnson
C nstruction Administrator
Attachment (1)
74
ATE Established In 1918 as a public.agency lnl
Coachella Valley Water District FEB 1.
TR` CITY ar- LA aut�tra
Directors: Olficers:
Peter Nelson, President Sloven B. Robbins, General Manager -Chief Engineer
Patricia A. Larson, Vice President Julla Hernandez, Secretary
Tellis Codekas Mark Beuhler, Asst, General Manager
John W. McFadden Dan Parks, Asti. To General Manager
Russell Kitahara February 5, 2009 Reds:fine and Sherrill, Attorneys
File: 0163, 1
Stan Sawa
City of La Quinta
73-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Mr, Sawa:
Thank you for affording the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) the opportunity to
review the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Villa Capri Commercial Project in La
Quinta. CVWD provides domestic water, wastewater, recycled water, irrigation/drainage,
regional stormwater protection and groundwater management services to a population of
265,000 throughout the Coachella Valley in Southern California.
At this time, CVWD submits the following comments regarding the proposed project:
1. Page III -47, Groundwater Replenishment- Please revise the last sentence of the paragraph
to read: "CVWD has also started a similar program in the southern portion of the C 1
Coachella Valley near Lake Cahuilla and in the Martinez Canyon area, southeast of La
Quinta."
2. Page III -73 Wastewater Collection and Treatment. Existing Conditions- Please revise the ] C 2
next to last sentence in the last paragraph to read: "WRP-4 is currently able to process a
maximum of 9.9 million gallons per day (mgd),"
If you have any questions, please contact Luke Stowe, Senior Environmental Specialist, at
extension 2545.
Yo Irs c •y-'•uly,
Mark L. Johnson
Director of Engineering
LS:ch\cn&nv\09\feh\LQ Villa Capri
$1 ATPr ei ir�antlA
Amottl 3cttvr�rze�eaaef. (�o earner_
NATiVE AMERICAN HERiTAGE COMMISSION
915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364
•y
SACRAMENTO, CA 96814
(916) 663.325'1
Fox 918 657-69..0
_
(r�
1 (
Web Site ypy}6 Pahc.c�.aav
i�
e-mail: ds_nahaQpaubelt.net
(I
L`
FEB 1 0 20G)
February 5, 2009
CITY OF L0. QUINT4
Pl.Ahltllpl0 DFPAIITrAIrTIT
Mr, Stan Sawa, Planner
CiTY OF LA GUINTA
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quanta, CA 92253
Re: SCH#2007121009' CEQA Notice of Completion• draft Environmental impact Report (DEIR) for the Site
Dear Mr. Sawa:
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) is the state'trustee agency' pursuant to Public
Resources Code §21070 designated to protect California's Native American Cultural Resources. The California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that any project that causes a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an historical resource, that includes archaeological resources, is a 'significant effect requiring the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) per the California Code of Regulations §15064,5(b)(c )(f) CEQA
guidelines). Section 15382 of the 2007 CEQA Guidelines defines a significant impact on the environment as "a
substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of physical conditions within an area affected by the
proposed project, including .., objects of historic or aesthetic significance," In order to comply with this provision,
the lead agency is required to assess whether the project will have an adverse impact on these resources within the
,area of potential effect (APE)', and if so, to mitigate that effect. To adequately assess the project -related impacts on
historical resources, the Commission recommends the following action:
J Contact the appropriate California Historic Resources Information Center (CHRIS) for possible 'recorded sites' in
locations where the development will or might occur.. Contact Information for the Information Center nearest you is
available from the State Office of Historic Preservation (916/653-7278)/ httP1&AvN.ohp.2arks.ca.,gov. The record
search will determine:
• If a part or the entire APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources.
• If any known cultural resources have already been recorded in or adjacent to the APE.
• If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE.
• If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.
J If an archaeological Inventory survey is required, the final stage Is the preparation of a professional report detailing
the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey.
• The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measurers should be submitted
immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American human
remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made
available for pubic disclosure.
■ The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate
regional archaeological Information Center.
J The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) performed:
A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search of the project'area of potential effect (APE)': The results: No known
Native American Cultural Resources were identified within one-half mile of the 'Area of potential effect
(APEV! However the NAHC SLF is not exhaustive and local tribal contacts should be consulted from the
attached list and the there are Native American cultural resources in close proximity..
• The NAHC advises the use of Native American Monitors, also, when professional archaeologists or the
equivalent are employed by project proponents, in order to ensure proper Identification and care given cultural
resources that may be discovered. The NAHC, FURTHER, recommends that contact be made with N 've
American Contacts on the attached list to get their input on potential IMPACT of the project (APE) on cultural
resources.. In some cases, the existence of a Native American cultural resources may be known only to a local
tribe(s) or Native American individuals or elders. -1. ® -
• J Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their subsurface existence.
• Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of
accidentally discovered archeological resources, per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) §15064.5 (f).
In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native
American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monitor ail ground -disturbing activities.
G
Dl
s Again, a culturally -affiliated Native American tribe may be the only source of information about a Sacred'
Site/Native American cultural resource.
0 Lead ,iUencie-a should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the disposition of recovered artifacts, in
consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans. — —1--
4 Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains or unmarked, cemetA.nes
in their mitigation plans.
CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(d) requires the lead agency to work with the Native Americans ideotitifietl
by this. Commission if the initial Study identifies the presence or likely presence of Native American human
remains within the APE. CEQA Guidelines provide for agreements with Native American, identified by trop
NAHC, to assure the appropriate and dignified treatment of Native American human remains �.nd any associated
grave liens.
( Health and Safety Code §7050.5, PuNic Resources Code §5097.98 and Sec. §15064.5 (d) of the California Code
of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines) mandate procedures to be followed, including that construction or excavation be
stopped in the eveni of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery
until the county coroner or medical examiner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. .
Note that §7f152 of the Health & Safety Code states that disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony,,.,_®,..
LL ^-,_ s mono
Please feel free to contact me at (916) 65? 66251 if you have any questions.
Ana
Attachment: List of Native American Contacts
Cc: State Clearinghouse
D2
D3
D4
Native American (;ontacts
Riverside County
February 5, 2009
Cabazon Band of Mission Indians Torres -Martinez Deseit Cahijilla Indians
John A. James, Chairperson Ernest Morreo
54-945 Indio Springs Parkway Cahuilla PO Box 1160 iluiila
Indio CA 92203-3499 Thermal CA ')2274
(760) 342-2593 ma>:tm@aol.com
(760) 347-7880 Fax (760) 397-0300
(760) 397-8146 Fax
Los Coyotes Band of Mission Indians
Katherine Saubel, Spokesperson
P.O. Box 189 Cahuilla
Warner , CA 92086
lo-7,coyotes@earthlink.net
(760) 782-0711
(760) 782-2701 - FAX
Ramona Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
Joseph Hamilton, Chairman
P.O. Box 391670 Cahuilla
Anza , CA 92539
admin@ramonatribe.com
(951) 763-4105
(951) 763-4325 Fax
Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
Raymond Torres, Chairperson
PO Box 1160 Cahuilla
Thermal CA 92274
(760) 397-0300
(760) 397-8146 Fax
This list Is current only as of the date of this document.
Santa Rosa Band cif Mission lndi ins
John Marcus, Chali'man
P.O. Box 609 Cahuilla
Hemet CA 92546
srtribaloffice @ aol.com
(951) 658-5311
(951) 658-6733 Fax
Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
Mary Ann Green, Chairperson
P,O: Box 846 Cahuilla
Coachella CA 92236
(760) 369-7171
760-369-7161
Morongo Band of Mission Indians
Michael Contreras, Cultural Heritage Prog
13000 Fields Road Cahuilla
Banning , CA 92220 Serrano
(951) 755-5025
(951)201-1866 - cell
(951) 922-0105 Fax
Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined In Section 7050.5 of the Health and
;'safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Reoources Col.:.^.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed
^Hg2007121009; CEQA Notice of Completion; draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for Site Development Permit
No. 03-875 and TPM 35088; located In the City of La Culnta; Riverside County, Caltfornla.
Manager
Native American Cont, Ic is
Riverside .(,ounty
February 5, 2009
Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
Diana L. Chihuahua, Cultural Resources Coordinator
P.O. Boxt 1160 Cahuilla
Thermal , CA 92274
cultural_monitor@yahoo.com
760) 397-0300, Ext. 1209
(760) 275 -2686 -CELL
(760) 397-8146 Fax
Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
Judy Stapp, Director of Cultural Affairs
€54-2445 Indio Springs Parkway Cahuilla
Indio , CA 92203-3499
jstapp @ cabazonindians-nsn.
(760) 342-2593
(760) 347-7880 Fax
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians THPO
Patricia Tuck, Tribal Historic Perservation Officer
5401 Dinah Shore Drive Cahuilla
Palm Springs , CA 92264
ptuck@aguacallente-nsn.gov
(760) 699-6907
(760) 699-6800
(760) 699-6924- Fax
Thir list Is current only as of the date of this document.
Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Wealth &nd
Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.96 of the Public Resources Code.
Thin list is onIV applicable for contacting local Native Americans with ragard to cultural resources for the proposed
SC:U.'2007121009; CEQA Notice of Completion; draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for Sita Development Parmft
No. 06,x75 And TPM 35488; located In the City of La Qulnta; Riverside County, California.
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
TRANSPORTATION AND
LAND MA NA GEMENT A GENCY
February 19, 2009
Transportation Department
Mr Stan Sawa
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
(OF RfVF9 . E
a �
rgTION �E p•" �
Juan C. Perez, PE., T.E.
Director of Transportation
FEB 2 3 209
CITY OF LA QU1N nA
Subject: Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for Tentative Map 35088:
Villa Capri in the City of La Quinta, CA
Dear Mr. Sawa:
Thank you for giving the Riverside County Transportation Department the opportunity
to review the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for Tentative Map 35088: Villa
Capri in the City of La Quinta.
While the Transportation Department is concerned about the traffic impacts of the
project on Washington Street and at the intersection of Washington Street/Howley Lane, E 1
the Department concurs with the conclusions presented in the DEIR that mitigation
measures in the form of lane additions along Washington Street and at the intersection
would be infeasible.
Thank you again for the opportunity to review the DEIR.
Sincerely,
&ah'
orashadi, P.E.
Engineering Division Manager
FK:rg
cc: George A. Johnson, TLMA Director
Juan C. Perez, Director of Transportation
Patricia Romo, Deputy Director
4080 I_enwn Sweet, 8th Ffoc>r • Riverside, California 92501 • (95 1) 955-6740
P.U. Box 1090 • Riverside, Calik-will r 93502.1090 • FAX (951) 955-3198
�%i'"iS
THE
F'OBERT MAYER,
CORPORATION
February 27, 2009
Mr. Stan Sawa
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Mayer Villa Capri
Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH 42007121009)
Dear Stan:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for our
project at Fred Waring andWashington (the "Project"). Although we find the EIR extremely
complete and thorough, we offer the following for your consideration. We look forward to your
response and the final certification of the EIR in the very near future.
0
Mitigation Measure Number 3 under "Air Quality" ("MM3") provides that "all structures ]In
the proposed project shall demonstrate energy efficiency which exceeds the standards of T
of the Uniform Building Code by 20%." [EIR page III -21.] The EIR fails, however, to proF 1
any analysis which would document the need, effectiveness or feasibility of this measure.
reviewing this requirement with the Project architects and construction staff, we have been
advised that this requirement is not economically feasible within current technology.
CEQA mitigation measures must be designed to reduce project impacts to a level of being
than significant. MM3 is designed to reduce impacts to air quality and climate change froi
Project's operation. Yet the EIR's analysis shows that the impacts on air quality and clim,
change from the operation of the structures on the Project site is already negligible. Speci:
the EIR, atpage III -20 describes the Project's impacts on climate change by stating:
"The project's total GHG emissions at buildout represent, 001% of
California's 2004 GHG emissions and 0.0001 % of the nations 2004 GHG
emissions. The proposed project does not interfere with any of the goals set forth
in AB 32 and is therefore not expected to have significant impacts on climate
change and global warming due to the emission ofgreenhouse gases during
project construction or operation. "
660 Newport Center Drive. Suite 1050 . Newport Beach, CA 92660
P.O. Box 8680. Newport Beach, CA 92658-8680
tel 949.759.8091 . fax 919,720.1017
F2
In terms of Air Quality, the EIR describes the impacts from the Project's operation on page III -
18 by stating:
"The Air Quality Study, prepared by Endo Engineering, shows that
operational emissions from stationary sources are negligible for all criteria
pollutants except for ROG [reactive organic gases]. At buildout the project
would contribute 3,29 pounds per day of ROG, which is well below the daily
threshold of 75 pounds per day.
Operational emissions from stationary sources at buildout of the proposed
project are projected to have less than significant impacts on air quality as
emission levels are well below established thresholds, "
It is clear, therefore, from the detailed analysis contained in the EIR that MM3 is not necessary
to mitigate the Project's impacts to air quality or climate change and therefore MM3 lacks the
essential nexus to the Project's impacts required under well settled Constitutional principals. The
impact on the Project from MM3 is clearly disproportionate to the Project's impact on either air
quality or climate change, and therefore this mitigation measure fails the Constitutionally
required "proportionality" test, and the mitigation measure should, therefore, be stricken..
F2
The requirement to exceed Title 24 energy efficiency requirements by 20% is not required by
any current federal, state or city statute or regulation. This requirement is not imposed on a city-
wide basis, and therefore its imposition on this Project places this property at an unfair
disadvantage, as compared to other similarly situated properties in the City. There is nothing F
unique about this Project which would warrant MM3 while similar measures are not warranted in
all other projects in the City. In addition to lacking the nexus and proportionality required by
constitutional law principals, MM3 burdens this Project unfairly in a way that is unique in this
City, and MM3 should therefore be stricken.
The wording of MM3 specifically references the need to exceed Title 24 energy efficiency
standards by 20%. If, in the future, Title 24 is amended to increase its energy efficiency
standards, with the wording of MM3, the Project would be required to not only meet the new
standards but to exceed them by 20%. Given that the 20% requirement has already made the
Project economically infeasible, such an increase would seal its fate.
F4
We recognize that MM3 is designed to encourage energy efficient design, and we concur that
energy efficient design is an important part of any project today. In fact, we believe that the
marketplace will increasingly demand energy efficient design. However, selecting an arbitrary
20% margin for exceeding Title 24 standards without determining the feasibility of such a
requirement, will not, with current technology result in an energy efficient project, it will result
in no project.
The City's concern and commitment to energy efficient design is adequately protected by
Mitigation Measure Number 2 under Air Quality ("MM2"), which requires that the Project:
"Utilize sitstainable building practices such as Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building standards for building F S
construction to the greatest extent possible, " [EIR, page III -21.]
Unlike MM3, MM2 assures energy efficient design without making the Project infeasible. It .
also requires Project design to evolve with improvements in energy efficiency technologies.
Based on the foregoing, we would request that MM3 be stricken, or if the City intends to adopt
energy efficiency standards in the fixture, to protect its ability to impose those standards, we
would suggest that MM3 be modified to read as follows: F 6
"Each structure within the proposed project shall comply with the city-wide energy
efficiency standards in effect for development in the City at the time that building permits for that
structure are issued. "
Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on the EIR. If you have any questions, please
do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
The Robert Mayer Corporation
Lawrence F. Brose
Senior Vice President
LFB:hs
cc: Emily Hemphill
Marvin Roos
Linda S. Adams
Secretary for
Environmental Protection
Department of Toxic Substances Control
February 25, 2009
Maureen F. Gorsen, Director
5796 Corporate Avenue
Cypress, California 90630
Mr. Stan Sawa
City of La Quinta Planning Department
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
I ♦ VU
G
NAR - 2 2009
Clay of La Quinta
Planning Departm9ni
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Governor
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR CITY SITE DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT 06-875 & TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 35088 (SCH# 2007121009)
Dear Mr. Sawa:
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your
submitted Environmental Impact Report for the above-mentioned project. The
following project description is stated in your document: "The project involves a
Site Development Permit that proposes retail and medical office complex, as
well as an acute care rehabilitation facility on 25.05 acres of vacant land.
Development of the site includes an office complex totaling 130, 450 square
feet and 103,972 square feet retail commercial shopping center".
DTSC has the following comments:
1) The EIR should evaluate whether conditions within the project area may
pose a threat to human health or the environment. Following are the
databases of some of the regulatory agencies:
• National Priorities List (NPL): A list maintained by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA).
• Envirostor (formerly CalSites): A Database primarily used by the
California Department of Toxic Substances Control, accessible
through DTSC's website (see below).
Resource Conservation and Recovery information System
(RCRIS): A database of RCRA facilities that is maintained by U.S.
EPA.
Printed on Recycled Paper
G1
Mr. Stan Sawa
February 25, 2009
Page 2 of 4
• Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS): A database of CERCLA sites that is
maintained by U.S.EPA.
• Solid Waste Information System (SWIS): A database provided by the
California Integrated Waste Management Board which consists of both
open as well as closed and inactive solid waste disposal facilities and
transfer stations.
• Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) / Spills, Leaks,
Investigations and Cleanups (SLIC): A list that is maintained by Regional
Water Quality Control Boards.
Local Counties and Cities maintain lists for hazardous substances cleanup G1
• sites and leaking underground storage tanks.
• The United States Army Corps of Engineers, 911 Wilshire Boulevard,
Los Angeles, California, 90017, (213) 452-3908, maintains a list of
Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS).
2) The EIR should identify the mechanism to initiate any required investigation
and/or remediation for any site that may be contaminated, and the government
agency to provide appropriate regulatory oversight. If necessary, DTSC would
require an oversight agreement in order to review such documents.
3) Any environmental investigations, sampling and/or remediation for a site should
be conducted under a Workplan approved and overseen by a regulatory agency
that has jurisdiction to oversee hazardous substance cleanup. The findings of
any investigations, including any Phase I or II Environmental Site Assessment
Investigations should be summarized in the document. All sampling results in
which hazardous substances were found above regulatory standards should be
clearly summarized in a table. All closure, certification or remediation approval
reports by regulatory agencies should be included in the EIR.
5) If buildings, other structures, asphalt or concrete -paved surface areas are being
planned to be demolished, an investigation should also be conducted for the
presence of other hazardous chemicals, mercury, and asbestos containing G 2
materials (ACMs). If other hazardous chemicals, lead-based paints (LPB) or
products, mercury or ACMs are identified, proper precautions should be taken
during demolition activities. Additionally, the contaminants should be remediated
in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies.
6) Future project construction may require soil excavation or filling in certain areas.
Sampling may be required. If soil is contaminated, it must be properly disposed
and not simply placed in another location onsite. Land Disposal Restrictions G 3
(LDRs) may be applicable to such soils. Also, if the project proposes to import
Mr. Stan Sawa
February 25, 2009
Page 3 of 4
soil to backfill the areas excavated, sampling should be conducted to ensure that
the imported soil is free of contamination.
7) Human health and the environment of sensitive receptors should be protected
during any construction or demolition activities. If necessary, a health risk
assessment overseen and approved by the appropriate government agency
should be conducted by a qualified health risk assessor to determine if there are,
have been, or will be, any releases of hazardous materials that may pose a risk
to human health or the environment.
8) If it is determined that hazardous wastes are, or will be, generated by the
proposed operations, the wastes must be managed in accordance with the
California Hazardous Waste Control Law (California Health and Safety Code;
Division 20, Chapter 6.5) and the Hazardous Waste Control Regulations
(California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4.5). If it is determined that
hazardous wastes will be generated, the facility should also obtain a United
States Environmental Protection Agency Identification Number by contacting
(800) 618-6942. Certain hazardous waste treatment processes or hazardou:
materials, handling, storage or uses may require authorization from the local
Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Information about the requiremer
authorization can be obtained by contacting your local COPA.
G3
G4
G5
9) If the project area was used for agricultural, livestock or related activities, onsite
soils and groundwater might contain pesticides, agricultural chemical, organic G6
waste or other related residue. Proper investigation, and remedial actions, if
necessary, should be conducted under the oversight of and approved by a
government agency in the project area prior to construction of the project.
10) In future CEQA documents please provide the contact person's title and e-mail G7
address.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at
ashami ct.dtsc,ca.gov or by phone at (714) 484-5472.
Sincerely,
f
I �i
P je�ct Manager
B �vnfields and Environmental Restoration Program -Cypress Office
cc: See next page.
Mr. Stan Sawa
February 25, 2009
Page 4 of 4
cc: Governor's Office of Planning and Research
State Clearinghouse
P.O. Box 3044
Sacramento, California 95812-3044
state.clearinghouse@opr.ca.gov.
CEQA Tracking Center
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Office of Environmental Planning and Analysis
1001 1 Street, 22nd Floor, M.S. 22-2
Sacramento, California 95814
gmoskat@dtsc.ca.gov
C EQA#2442
California Regional Water Quality Control Board H
Colorado River Basin Region
Linda S. Adams 73-720 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 100, Palm Desert, California 92260 Arnold Schwarzenegger
Secretaryfor (760) 346-7491 • Fax (760) 341-6820 Governor
Environmental Protection htM-.//www waterboards ca gov/coloradoriver
March 3, 2009
Mr. Stan Sawa Nicole Sauviat Criste
City of La Quinta Tena Nova Planning & Research Inc
78-495 Calle Tampico 400 South Farrell, Suite B-205
La Quinta, CA 92253 Palm Springs, CA 92262
Subject: Site Development Permit 06-875 and Tentative Parcel Map 35088 known as Villa
Capri Commercial Project
Dear Mr. Sawa and Ms. Christe,
Following a preliminary review of this project, Regional Water Board staff has determined
that the following checked. items may be relevant to this project.
❑ Waste Discharge Requirements or a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Permit is required to discharge treated wastewater and/or sludge.
® A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for storm water
discharges associated with construction activities is required for projects disturbing HI
one or more acres. An NPDES storm water permit is also required for projects that
are part of a common plan and disturb one or more acres.
❑ Waste Discharge Requirements may be required to discharge processed or treated
wastewater. Facilities commonly requiring waste discharge requirements include: car
and track washes; sand and gravel washing operations; concentrated animal feeding
operations; aquatic animal production facilities; manufacturing facilities; and facilities
using reclaimed wastewater for landscaping.
❑ Waste Discharge Requirements may be required, for new subdivisions, grouped or
community septic 'tank/seepage pit or leach field systems, particularly in vulnerable
areas.
❑ An NPDES permit for storm water discharges associated with industrial facilities is
required due to the facilities Standard Industrial Code (SIC).
❑ General Waste Discharge Requirements .may be required if the project involves: ❑
discharges of water used for hydrostatic testing of pipelines; 0 a confined animal
IB
Environmental Document
Comments
facility; ❑ discharges of extracted and/or treated groundwater; ❑ mobile home parks,
❑ other waste discharge facilities.
❑ A fuel storage statement may need to be filed with the State Water Resources Control
Board, depending on the size of the fuel storage facility.
❑ Projects that impact "Waters of the U.S." require a ,Clean Water Act (CWA) Section
404 permit issued by the United States Army Corp of Engineers (Corps). A CWA
Section 401 Water Quality Certification is required to obtain a Section 404 permit from
the Corps. .
❑ Projects using chemical dust control suppressants are reviewed on a case by case
basis, and may require Waste Discharge Requirements.
If you have questions regarding your responsibility to protect water quality as it relates to
your project, please contact the staff checked below, and obtain the appropriate permits (if
any) prior to the discharge of waste.
❑
Storm Water, MS4......................................
Jay Mirpour, WRCE
(760) 776 - 8981
❑
401 Water Quality Certifications .....................Jay
Mirpour, WRCE
(760) 776 - 8981
®
Storm Water, CalTrans................................
Construction, & Industrial
Suhas Chakraborty, WRCE
(760) 776 - 8961
❑
NPDES (Discharges to Waters .....................John
Carmona, Senior WRCE
of the U.S.)
(760) 340 - 4521
❑
Aquaculture, Feedlots, Dairy's .......................
John Carmona, Senior WRCE
(760) 340 - 4521
❑
Discharges to Land, Landfills .........................
Cliff Raley, Senior WRCE
Biosolids
(760) 776 - 8962
❑
New Development in Un-sewered ..................Cliff
Raley, Senior WRCE
Communities (Septic Systems)
(760) 776 - 8962
❑
Chemical Dust Suppressants........................Cliff
Raley, Senior WRCE
(760) 776-8962
-2-
i
,,
�-
,. _
� -
i
-