Loading...
PC Resolution 2014-019PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2014 - 019 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2014-635, PREPARED FOR PHASE FOUR OF WASHINGTON PARK CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2014-635 APPLICANT: JACK TARR DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on the 26th day of August, 2014, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Jack Tarr Development for approval of Environmental Assessment 2014-635, prepared for Conditional Use Permit 2014-158 and Site Development Permit 2014-938, generally located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 47, more particularly described as: APN: 643-020-032 WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment complies with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2014-635) and determined that the Conditional Use Permit and Site Development constitute a "project" as defined by CEQA and that the development of the proposed project would not have a significant impact on the environment, and is recommending that a Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department mailed and published a Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21092 on the 61h day of August, 2014 to the Riverside County Clerk; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published a public hearing notice in The Desert Sun newspaper on August 15, 2012 as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; 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 adoption of said Environmental Assessment: Planning Commission Resolution 2014 - 019 Environmental Assessment 2014-635 Washington Park Phase 4 (Jack Tarr Development) Adopted: August 26, 2014 Page 2 of 4 1. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared and processed in compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's implementation procedures. The Planning Commission has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Environmental Assessment, and finds that it adequately describes and addresses the environmental effects of the project. Based upon the Initial Study, the comments received thereon, and the entire record of proceeding for this project, the Planning Commission finds that there are no significant environmental effects resulting from this project. 2. The project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2014- 635. 3. The project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number, or restrict the range of, rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history, or prehistory. 4. There is no evidence before the City that the project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 5. The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified under Environmental Assessment 2014-635. 6. The project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the City will not be significantly affected by the project. 7. The project will not create environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant Planning Commission Resolution 2014 - 019 Environmental Assessment 2014-635 Washington Park Phase 4 (Jack Tarr Development) Adopted: August 26, 2014 Page 3 of 4 impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 8. The Planning Commission has fully considered the proposed Negative Declaration and any comments received thereon, and there is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. 9. The Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 2014-635 and said assessment reflects the independent judgment of the City. 10. 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). 11. Based upon the Initial Study and the entire record of proceedings, the Project has no potential for adverse effects on wildlife as that term is defined in Fish and Game Code § 71 1 .2. 12. The location of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission decision is based upon, are located in the La Quinta City Hall, Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: SECTION 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the Findings of the Planning Commission in this case; SECTION 2. That is does hereby approve Environmental Assessment 2014-635 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the original Environmental Assessment Checklist (Exhibit "A") attached hereto, and on file in the Community Development Department. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this the 26th day of August, 2014, by the following vote: Planning Commission Resolution 2014 - 019 Environmental Assessment 2014-635 Washington Park Phase 4 (Jack Tarr Development) Adopted: August 26, 2014 Page 4 of 4 AYES: Commissioners Bettencourt, Blum, Wilkinson, and Chairperson Wright NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Fitzpatrick ABSTAIN: None ROBE WRIGHT, Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JOHNSON, Community Development Director ity of La Quinta, California Environmental Checklist Form Project title: Site Development Permit 2014-938, Washington Park, Phase 4 Lead agency name and address: Contact person and phone number: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Jay Wuu 760-777-7125 Project location: 46-795 Washington Street La Quinta, California Project sponsor's name and address: Jack Tarr Development 30240 Rancho Viejo Road General Plan: General Commercial San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 Zoning: CR (Regional Commercial) 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.) The proposed project is located at the northeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 47 and is Phase 4 of the Washington Park Specific Plan (SP 87-011). The project proposes one 42,427 square foot, 12-screen movie theater with on -site improvements, including a parking lot, parking lot lighting, landscaping, and drainage infrastructure. It also includes three building pads, ranging from approximately 5,974 to 6,853 square feet, for future development. The Site Development Permit is proposed for the theater and its improvements only. The pad sites will be developed separately. Access to the site will be provided from Washington Street and from 47th Street. Access points are consistent with those proposed in the original Specific Plan. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Regional Commercial (part of SP 87-011), existing retail development South: Avenue 47, Community Commercial, existing retail and office development East: La Quinta Center Drive, Vacant parcel (part of SP 87-011); Regional Commercial further east (part of 87-011) West: Washington Street, Low Density Residential, existing single family development Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None. -1- 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 and Forestry Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials El Hydrology /Water Quality ❑ Land Use / Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population / Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities / Service Mandatory Findings of ❑ ❑ Systems ❑ Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: X 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 project proponent. 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" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Date -2- 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 referenced 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) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than 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 XVII, "Earlier Analyses," 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). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures 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. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. -3- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, X trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and X its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely X affect day or nighttime views in the area? Source: 2035 General Plan, La Quinta Municipal Code, project materials. I. a) Less than Significant. None of the streets immediately adjacent to the subject property are designated as Image Corridors in the 2035 General Plan, with the exception of Washington Street. Properties in the project vicinity generally enjoy views of the Santa Rosa Mountains located to the west and southwest. Surrounding views of the subject property are already obstructed, to some extent, by a commercial retail and low density residential. The proposed project will set back the largest mass of building, the movie theatre, from the scenic corridor along Washington Street. The future restaurant pads will be required to comply with the height and parkway requirements for scenic corridors, which are designed to mitigate potential impacts. The proposed project will result in the development of a 42,427 square foot, 12-screen movie theater and three building pads, ranging from approximately 5,974 to 6,853 square feet, for future development of potential restaurants. Much of land surrounding the subject property is currently built out with commercial retail of similar intensity and mass as the proposed project. The proposed theater building will be up to 50 feet in height. It will be located a minimum of 575 feet away from the nearest street, and as much as 750 feet away from a street. The distance from surrounding residential development will mitigate the potential viewshed impacts associated with the project. Surrounding residential development will therefore experience little impact from development of the proposed project as it relates to scenic vistas, insofar as views of the mountains to the west will not be affected by the project. Views to the northwest could no longer view the foothills, but will still provide views of the slopes and peaks of the Point Happy area currently visible from surrounding areas. Impacts to scenic vistas are expected to be less than significant. b) No Impact. The proposed project is not located near an existing or proposed state scenic highway. There are no scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, or historical -4- buildings located onsite. The site is currently vacant and appears to have been previously graded. There will be no impact to scenic resources. c) Less than Significant. The existing visual character of the surrounding area consists of a mix of land uses, including single-family homes to the west, commercial retail/office to the south, residential development to the southeast, and commercial retail development to the north and northeast. The subject property is currently vacant and appears to have been previously graded with sparse native desert vegetation re -growth. The proposed movie theater will be constructed in the same style and with generally the same architectural mass and scale as existing buildings immediately north and northeast of the subject property. New landscaping will be limited to an approved plant palette consistent with the surrounding desert environment. The building pads for future restaurants on the site are proposed adjacent to Washington Street. These structures will be single story, in a style and mass consistent with other buildings already constructed within the Specific Plan area. The larger movie theatre building has been set far back on the site, also consistent with other larger buildings within the project, such as the Lowes Home Improvement Store immediately north. The theater building occurs, at its closest point to a public street, approximately 62 feet from La Quinta Center Drive. At its closest point to Avenue 47, the theater building is over 350 feet away, and at its closest point to Washington Street, the theater is over 400 feet away. The project will be surrounded by landscaping, consistent with the landscaping that currently exists within the Specific Plan area. The landscaping will serve to buffer the commercial structures from view, particularly from the single family residential development on the west side of Washington Street, and on the south side of Avenue 47. The proposed project will not substantially degrade the visual character of the area, and impacts are expected to be less than significant. d) Less than Significant. Approval of the proposed project will result in the construction of movie theater and three building pads for future development. Lighting will be generated by decorative and security lighting fixtures on the building and parking lot, vehicles utilizing the parking lot, and occasional delivery trucks. Lighting generated from the proposed project is expected to be similar to that generated by existing commercial development to the immediate north and south, and traffic along Washington Street, Avenue 47 and La Quinta Center Drive. The proposed project will be required to abide by the City of La Quinta lighting ordinance, which requires proper shielding of light sources and prohibits light spillage on adjacent properties. A lighting plan has been submitted and will be reviewed and approved based on its consistency with these standards, prior to development. With implementation of screening requirements and compliance with City lighting standards, lighting impacts associated with the proposed project are expected to be less than significant. -5- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland X Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act X contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of X Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Source: 2035 General Plan, California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping, project materials. II. a-c) No Impact. The subject property is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, according to the California Dept. of Conservation, nor is it used for agricultural purposes. The subject area is characterized by urban development, including commercial retail and single-family housing. The properties are designated for urban uses in the La Quinta General Plan, and the proposed project will not result in any changes to agricultural lands. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the subject property or properties in the vicinity. The proposed property and immediate area are not zoned for agricultural use and will not result in the conversion of existing farmland to non-agricultural uses. There will be no impacts to agricultural resources. -6- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air X quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or X projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or X state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? Source: 2035 General Plan, 2012 SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan, CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2, project materials. III. a) No Impact. Riverside County, the City of La Quinta, and the subject property are subject to the provisions of the 2012 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan, which describes the District's plan to achieve Federal and State air quality standards set forth in Federal and State Clean Air Acts. The City of La Quinta is located in the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) and is subject to the rules and regulations imposed by the SCAQMD including Rule 403-1, which governs fugitive dust emissions from project construction within the Coachella Valley. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the City of La Quinta General Plan and Washington Park Specific Plan (SP 87-011). Additionally, the proposed project does not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD air quality management plan. Therefore, the proposed project will not significantly impact air quality management planning. b, c) Less than Significant. Both the construction and operational phases of the proposed project will result in the release of criteria air pollutants. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) was used to project air quality emissions that will be generated by construction and operation of the proposed project. Table 1 summarizes the short-term construction -related emissions, and Table 2 summarizes the ongoing emissions that will be generated at operation. -7- Construction Emissions The construction period includes all aspects of project development, such as site preparation, grading, paving, building construction, and architectural coating. For analysis purposes, it is assumed that construction of the entire project will occur over a one-year period extending from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015. This is a conservative estimate, as construction of the three restaurant pads will occur after development of the theater site. As shown in Table 1, emissions generated by construction activities will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance for criteria air pollutants. The data reflect average daily emissions over the one-year construction period, including both summer and winter weather conditions. It should be mentioned that the Table below shows the projected unmitigated emissions. Implementation of standard requirements during construction will further reduce emission levels. Applicable standard requirements include, but are not limited to, the implementation of dust control practices in conformance with SCQAMD Rule 403 and the Coachella Valley PM10 Management Plan, proper maintenance and limited idling of heavy equipment, and the use of low -polluting architectural paint and coatings. Impacts to air quality from construction of the proposed project for criteria pollutants, therefore, are expected to be less than significant. Table 1 Construction -Related Emissions Summary (pounds per day) CO NO,, ROG SO2 PMto PM2.5 Construction Emissions' 48.3 74.28 17.07 0.58 20.67 12.29 SCAQMD 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Thresholds ' Average of winter and summer emissions, unmitigated. Construction is assumed to occur in 2015. Source: CaIEEMod, version 2013.2.2. Operational Emissions Operational emissions are ongoing emissions that will occur over the life of the project. They include area source emissions, emissions from energy (electric and natural gas) demand, and mobile source (vehicle) emissions. Table 2, below, provides a summary of projected emissions at operation of the proposed project. Table 2 Operation -Related Emissions Summary (noundsDer dav) CO NO,, ROG SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Total Operational Emissions' 252.49 51.56 37.89 0.23 14.53 4.40 SCAQMD 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Thresholds ' Average of winter and summer emissions, unmitigated. Source: CaIEEMod, version 2013.2.2 As shown in the table, operational emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of -8- significance for any criteria pollutants. Non -Attainment Historically, the Coachella Valley, which includes the proposed project site, has been classified as a "non -attainment" area for PMIo. In order to achieve attainment in the region, the 2003 Coachella Valley PMIo Management Plan was adopted, which established strict standards for dust management for development proposals. The SSAB is currently (July 2014) a non- attainment area for PMIo and is classified as attainment/unclassifiable for PM2.5. The proposed project will contribute to an incremental increase in regional ozone and PMIo emissions. However, this impact is not expected to be cumulatively considerable. Project construction and operation emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for PMIo or ozone precursors, and appropriate standard requirements and conditions of approval will be implemented that will further reduce emissions. The project will not conflict with any attainment plans and will result in less than significant impacts. d) Less than Significant. To determine if the proposed project has the potential to generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts, the 5-acre mass rate LST Look -Up Table for SRA 30 (Coachella Valley) was utilized. LSTs are summarized in the table below for sensitive receptors located approximately 50 meters from the emission source. Emission estimates reflect all phases of construction including site preparation, grading/excavation, building, paving, and architectural coating. As shown in Table 3 below, LST thresholds will not be exceeded during construction of the project. Impacts will be less than significant. Table 3 Localized Significance Thresholds (pounds per day) CO NOx PMIo *PM2.5 Project Emissions) 48.3 74.28 20.67 6.23 LST 3,237 340 44 11 Exceed? No No No No 1 Average of winter and summer emissions, unmitigated. * Shows mitigated conditions i.e. implementation of standard dust control measures Source: CalEEMod, version 2013.2.2 e) Less than Significant. The proposed project is not expected to generate objectionable odors during any of the phases of construction or at project buildout. The proposed project has the potential to result in short term odors associated with paving and other construction activities. However any such odors would be quickly dispersed below detectable thresholds as distance from the construction site increases. Therefore, impacts from objectionable odors are expected to be less than significant. In Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local X or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional X plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, X vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with X established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, X such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or X other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Source: 2035 General Plan, Coachella Valley MSHCP, project materials. IV. a) Less than Significant. Biological resources in the project area have been affected by area roadways and urban development. There are areas of sparse vegetative re -growth on -site, however native habitat has been highly degraded due to previous grading and other ground -10- disturbing activities. The proposed project is located immediately adjacent to two roadways and is surrounded by urban development, resulting in a minimal potential to affect biological resources. It is anticipated that the project will not have a substantial effect on sensitive plant or wildlife species, federally listed species, or state species of concern, or their habitats. The City of La Quinta participates in the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CV MSHCP), which is a comprehensive regional plan encompassing a planning area of approximately 1.1 million acres and conserving approximately 240,000 acres of open space. The Plan is intended to address the conservation needs of a variety of plant and animal species and natural vegetation communities that occur in the Coachella Valley region. It establishes a system of preserves outside of urbanized areas in the valley in order to protect lands with high conservation value. It streamlines permitting processes by implementing state and federal endangered species acts while providing for land development within its planning area. The project site is not located in or near a conservation area, and will be required to pay mitigation fees to compensate for any impact to species included in the Plan. Impacts associated with sensitive species are expected to be less than significant. b-d) No Impact. The site is bounded on the west by Washington Street (an Urban Arterial roadway), on the south by 47th Avenue, and on the north and east by urban development. The ground surface has been disturbed by previous grading and other anthropogenic activities. There is no riparian habitat or wetlands on the site. The proposed project is located within an urban environment and is surrounded by developed and previously disturbed lands that are not expected to contain biologically valuable resources. There are no wildlife corridors on -site or in the project vicinity, and the site is not suitable for migratory species. The proposed project will have no impact on riparian species or habitat, wetlands or other sensitive natural communities or wildlife corridors. e,f) Less than Significant. The City of La Quinta has adopted the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). As a result, the City is required to implement a Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF) for projects located within the CVMSHCP plan area. Although the proposed project site is not within a designated conservation area as defined in the Plan, it is located with the Plan boundaries, and the developer will be required to pay LDMF. These fees are designed to offset potential impacts of cumulative projects on covered biological species, and assure that impacts are reduced throughout the Valley and City to less than significant levels. -11- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as X defined in ' 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological X resource pursuant to ' 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique X geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal X cemeteries? Source: 2035 General Plan, project materials. V.a-b) No Impact. According to the 2035 General Plan the subject property has been previously surveyed for cultural resources. There are no known historic, archaeological or paleontological resources of significance located on -site. The site is located in a developed area that has contained residential and commercial development for many years. It is bounded by Washington Street (an Urban Arterial roadway) on the west and 47th Street on the south; and both small-scale and large-scale commercial retail development to the north, northeast, and south. Previous analysis on the site was part of the Specific Plan approval, and mitigation measures, if needed, for the site were implemented prior to development of the master site plan and the grading on the site. Further, the City will require, as a standard requirement, that site excavation and grading be monitored for cultural resources. Given the area's highly disturbed nature from previous urban development, it is not anticipated that the proposed project will adversely affect historical or archaeological resources. c) No Impact. The proposed project site is located in an area of the City that is of undetermined paleontological sensitivity/significance (Exhibit III-5). The site is located outside the boundary of Ancient Lake Cahuilla, and has been previously graded. As a result of these disturbances, the soils within the project site are considered low in sensitivity for paleontological resources. Implementation of the project will have no impact on paleontological resources. d) No Impact. It is not anticipated that human remains will be encountered during construction of the proposed project because the site and surrounding area have been previously disturbed to accommodate development. However, should any previously unidentified or unanticipated human remains be discovered during project construction, state law requires that law enforcement be contacted, and the remains removed in a prescribed manner. The project will be subject to these requirements. No impacts are anticipated. -12- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact 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 X issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the X loss of topsoil? c) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-13 of the Uniform X Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? d) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems X where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Sources: 2035 General Plan; project materials. VI. a)i. No Impact. The proposed project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and there are no known active or potentially active faults on site or within the immediate vicinity. There will be no impacts associated with fault rupture on the project site. a)ii. Less than Significant. Ground shaking is judged to be the primary hazard most likely to affect the site. The project site is located in a seismically active area based upon proximity to four regionally significant faults; the San Andreas, San Jacinto -Anna segment, San -Jacinto - Coyote Creek segment, and Burnt Mountain fault. The San Andreas Fault is capable of generating a moment magnitude 7.4. All structures in the planning area will be subjected to significant groundshaking, and could be seriously damaged if not properly designed. All construction on the site will be required to abide be the Uniform Building Code for Seismic -13- Zone 4, which has been development with the goal of reducing impacts related to strong ground shaking to less than significant levels. a)iii. Less than Significant. Exhibit IV-3 of the 2035 General Plan indicates the project site is located in an areas of low liquefaction susceptibility. This area is characterized by fine- grained granular sediments that are normally susceptible to liquefaction, but groundwater depths are greater than 50 feet. The site is located in an area that is susceptible to high levels of groundshaking and may result in localized impacts related to liquefaction around saturated foundations or other load -carrying structures. The project is required to conform with the City Zoning Code and the Uniform Building Code Standards at the time of construction, thus reducing impacts related to liquefaction to less than significant levels. a)iv. No Impact. The proposed project site is relatively flat and is not located within the vicinity of a landform susceptible to landslides, such as a slope of hillside. No impacts are expected. b) Less than Significant. The project site is located within a high to very high Wind Erosion Hazard zone as identified in the 2035 General Plan Exhibit IV-5. The project area is susceptible to high winds that can cause wind erosion and soil displacement and accumulation. As described in the Air Quality section above, the applicant will be required to submit a dust control and management plan as part of the permitting process. Implementation of dust control management practices will reduce impacts associated with soil erosion and loss of topsoil to less than significant levels. c) Less than Significant. Soils in the planning area include alluvial sand and gravel with fine- grained lakebed deposits such as silts and clays in some areas. The project site is located on lands comprised of wind -laid dune sand (Qs) as shown in Exhibit IV-4 of the General Plan. As previously mentioned, the site appears to have been previously graded and disturbed to allow for future development. To ensure that expansion rates of on site soils pose no substantial risks to life or property in accordance with Table 18-1-B of the 1994 Uniform Building Code, the City will require project -specific geotechnical analysis to ensure that any issue associated with soil expansion is mitigated to less than significant levels through the site preparation process. d) No Impact. The proposed project occurs in an urbanized area of the City. The proposed project will be required to connect to sanitary sewer lines in the area, and no septic systems will be permitted. No impact is expected. -14- VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS -- Would theproject: Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have X a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse X gases? Source: CaIEEMod Version 2013.2.2, project materials. VII. a-b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during both construction and operation. As mentioned in Section III (Air Quality), CalEEMod was used to quantify air quality emission projections, including greenhouse gas emissions. CalEEMod estimates that the GHG emissions from construction activities will total approximately 449.03 metric tons of CO2e over the projected one-year construction period. Construction related greenhouse gas emissions will be temporary and will end once the project is completed. Operation of the proposed project will create on -going greenhouse gases through the consumption of electricity and natural gas, moving sources, the transport and pumping of water for onsite use, and the disposal of solid waste. Table 4 describes projected annual operational GHG generation. Table 4 Projected Annual Operational GHG Summary (Metric Tons/Year) CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Total 4,737.65 6.08 0.03 4,874.70 Source: CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2. There are currently no adopted thresholds of significance for GHG emissions for construction or operation of regional commercial developments. It is recognized that GHG impacts are intrinsically cumulative. As such, project construction and operation will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with applicable rules and regulation pertaining to the release and generation of GHG's. Statewide programs and standards will further reduce GHG emissions generated by the project, including new fuel -efficient standards for cars, newly adopted Building Code Title 24 standards, and increasing the renewable energy portfolio. The proposed project will have a less than significant impact on the environment from the emission of GHG's and will not conflict with any applicable GHG plans, policies or regulations. -15- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the X routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident X conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, X substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code X Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 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 X the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in X a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency X response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where X wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Source: 2035 General Plan, CA Department of Toxic Substances, project materials. -16- VII.a,b) Less than Significant. The proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public related to the emission, transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The project will result in the use of chemicals and materials similar to those being used by the existing commercial uses in the immediate vicinity. Project buildout will result in the construction of a 12-screen movie theater and three building pads for future development. The project will not require the transport or disposal of large amounts of hazardous waste. The City implements, through its solid waste provider, hazardous waste disposal programs to assure that these materials are properly disposed of. Impacts will be less than significant. c) No Impact. The nearest school is La Quinta High School located approximately 0.75 miles northeast of the proposed project. The project is not located within a quarter mile of a school nor will it result in the emission or handling of hazardous materials of significance. No impact is expected. d) No Impact. The project site is not located on or near a hazardous materials site as identified by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. It will not create a significant hazard to the public or environment. No impact is expected. e-f) No Impact. The project site is located approximately 2.7 miles southwest of the Bermuda Dunes airport. The project site is not susceptible to hazards associated with aviation. No impact is expected. g) No Impact. The proposed project will not physically interfere with local or regional roadway networks, or interfere with implementation of an emergency response or evacuation plan. The proposed project will have access to the City's existing street grid for emergency purposes. No impacts are expected. h) No Impact. The project site is located on the Valley floor, and is in a highly urbanized area. There will be no impacts associated with wildland fires. -17- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? 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 X level (e.g., 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)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a X stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off -site? 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 X the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or X provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate X Map or other flood hazard delineation map? g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or X redirect flood flows? Source: 2035 General Plan; FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel #2233G; project materials. -18- IX. a) No Impact. The proposed project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The project proponent will be required to implement National Pollution Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for storm flows by preparing and implementing SWPPP and WQMP. Project development will be connected to existing sewer lines in Washington Street and/or 47th Avenue. Wastewater will be transported to and processed at CVWD's Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4) in Thermal. CVWD implements all the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board as they relate to wastewater discharge requirements and water quality standards. Therefore, the proposed project will have less than significant impacts on water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. b) Less than Significant. Water for the proposed project will be supplied by CVWD. CVWD has prepared an Urban Water Management Plan 2010 Update, which is a long-term planning document that helps CVWD plan for current and future water demands. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan and is therefore addressed in the UWMP. The UWMP demonstrates that the District has available, or can supply, sufficient water to serve the proposed project. Impacts on groundwater supplies and recharge are expected to be less than significant c-e) Less than Significant. The project will result in impermeable hardscape onsite, which will increase surface runoff and somewhat alter the local drainage pattern. The subject property does not contain any streams or rivers, and storm water issues associated with this development will be limited to local drainage. The project proponent will be required to submit a stormwater drainage plan prior to construction which meets the City's standard requirements for on -site retention of the 100 year storm. All hydrology improvements will also be required to comply with NPDES standards, to assure that no polluted storm water enters other surface waters either during construction or operation of the project. The City's requirements assure that drainage patterns will not be significantly impacted by the proposed project. f-g) No Impact. The subject property is designated Zone X on FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, which is defined as an area of moderate to low risk of flood hazard. The proposed project will not place housing within the boundaries of the 100-year flood hazard area. No impacts are expected. -19- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established X community? 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 X plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community X conservation plan? Sources: 2035 General Plan, 2003 CVMSHCP Figure 4-1: conservation Areas; project materials. X. a) No Impact. The proposed project will not divide an established community. The property is located on the corner of Washington Street and 47t' Avenue between commercial development and residential development west of Washington Street and southeast on Avenue 47. The project will be a continuation of commercial development trends in the area. b) No Impact. The site is designated for regional commercial uses in the City's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and the proposed project conforms to these land use policies. The proposed project is Phase 4 of the approved Washington Park Specific Plan (SP 87-011) and is consistent with the specific plan. There will be no impacts. c) No Impact. The project site is not located within any conservation areas as identified in the CVMSHCP. However, the property is within the general boundaries of the Plan, and therefore the project proponent will be required to pay Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF). There will be no conflict with the Plan. -20- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of X value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local X general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Sources: 2035 General Plan, project materials. XI. a,b) No Impact. Mineral resources in the City consist primarily of sand and gravel. The proposed project site is located in Mineral Resource Zone MRZ-1, which indicates that no resources occur (Exhibit III-1, 2035 General Plan). There will be no impact to mineral resources as a result of the proposed project. -21- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XII. 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 X noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or X groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project X vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the X project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 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, X would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose X people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Source: 2035 General Plan Noise Element, project materials. XII. a) Less than Significant. The City of La Quinta Noise Element of the General Plan provides guidelines for community noise impacts per land use designation. The current City noise standards for non-residential land uses allow noise levels of 75 dBA from lam to lOpm, and 65 dBA from IOpm to lam. The primary source of noise in the City and project area is traffic related. The main source of off -site exterior noise impacting the project will be generated from traffic along Washington Street and Avenue 47. Tables IV-1 and IV-2 of the Noise Element provide noise analysis of various locations throughout the City. The average short term and long term noise levels generated from traffic on Washington Street is 72.7 dBA and 70 dBA. Public use of the theater and future restaurants will be transient in nature, and will therefore have a less than significant noise impact. The proposed project is located in proximity to residential land uses just west of Washington Street. According to City standards, residential land uses are considered "noise sensitive" -22- thereby restricting allowable noise levels within the planning area. The City requires that exterior noise levels not exceed 65 dBA CNEL in outdoor living areas, and interior noise levels not to exceed 45 dBA CNEL in all habitable rooms. Noise generated by project operation and related traffic is anticipated to be similar to existing noise on Washington Street and Avenue 47. The project will increase traffic on both these streets, but will not significantly impact traffic flows. The noise levels on both Washington and Avenue 47 are mitigated by existing walls and berms protecting existing residential development, and lowering noise levels at the residential sites. Therefore, noise impacts to surrounding residential land uses will be less than significant. b) Less than Significant. Development of the proposed project will temporarily generate noise and groundbourne vibrations through construction related activities, but will cease once in operation. The development of the site will be separated by existing roadways whose width will reduce vibrations during the construction process. Impacts are therefore expected to be less than significant. c,d) Less than Significant. The proposed project is consistent with zoning and General Plan designations for commercial use and will generate comparable noise levels. Surrounding land uses in proximity to the proposed site include commercial lands to the north, east and south, and low density residential to the west and southeast. The proposed project is consistent with lands immediately north, northeast and south of the site and will generate comparable noise levels. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. e,f) No Impact. The project is located approximately 2.7 miles to the south of the Bermuda Dunes Airport. Although an occasional overflight is likely, the approach patterns do not occur in the vicinity of the proposed project. There are no private airstrips in the region. Therefore, there will be no impact associated with airport noise. -23- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) X or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of X replacement housing elsewhere? Source: project materials. XIII. a) No Impact. The proposed project will result in the construction of 12-screen movie theater, three building pads for future development, and associated parking facilities and landscaping. The site will be accessible from existing roads (Washington Street and Avenue 47) and will not require the construction or extension of roads or other infrastructure. New employment opportunities generated by the project are expected to be filled by the existing workforce, and the project is not expected to induce population growth. b, c) No Impact. The proposed site is currently vacant and designated for commercial retail. The project will not result in the loss or relocation of housing stock. There will be no impact to housing. -24- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. 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? X Police protection? X Schools? X Parks? X Other public facilities? X Source: 2035 General Plan, Google Earth accessed July 2014, project materials. XIV. a) Fire Protection Less than Significant. The County of Riverside Fire Department provides Fire Protection for the proposed project. The nearest exiting fire station (Station #93) that would respond first to an incident is located approximately 1.5 miles north of the project site at 44555 Adams Street. There are two other stations located at 78111 Avenue 52 (#32) and 54001 Madison Street (#70). All County -operated stations feature a minimum of one trained paramedic as part of its three -person engine company per RCFD policy. The Fire Department also operates four additional stations in surrounding communities. The Department's response times range from two to six minutes and it holds an Insurance Services Office (ISO) public protection class rating of four based on the provision of staffing, communication, water system for suppression, building standards etc. The site will have immediate access to Washington Street and Avenue 47 for emergency purposes. Project development will be in accordance with all City Municipal Code and/or Riverside County Fire Protection Standards to assure adequate fire safety and emergency response. The project will contribute its fair share to the City's Developer Impact Fee program, which includes fire protection facilities. Impacts will be less than significant. Police Protection Less than Significant. The City contracts with the Riverside County Sheriff for police services. The nearest police station, located at City Hall, is approximately 2.5 miles south of the project site. The addition of a 12-screen movie theater and future development of three building pads will marginally increase the need for police services and the project's overall -25- impact to police services is expected to be less than significant. The project vicinity is currently patrolled and will continue to be patrolled after project development. The site will be immediately accessible from Washington Street and Avenue 47, and project development will occur in accordance with City standards to assure adequate police protection. Schools Less than Significant The proposed project will result in commercial retail and therefore, will not generate a large student population. Employees of the businesses within the project have the potential to increase student populations. The proposed project is located within the Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD) and will be required to pay the State mandated developer fee to help address and offset the potential impacts to local schools. Fees will be collected prior to the issuance of building permits, thereby reducing impacts to less than significant levels. Parks No Impact. Project buildout is not expected to impact local and/or regional parks. The project consists of a 12-screen movie theater and three building pads that will not induce population growth in the area, and therefore, will not increase the demand for parks and recreation facilities. -26- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that X substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which X might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Sources: project materials. XV. a, b) No Impact. Buildout of the proposed project will result in the construction of a 12-screen movie theater, three building pads and associated parking facilities and landscaping. The project does not include the construction of recreational facilities or require expansion of existing facilities. It is not expected to induce additional population growth or otherwise increase the use of existing parks and recreation facilities. -27- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. 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 X increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion X management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in X traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or X dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative X transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Source: 2035 General Plan, Traffic Report, project materials. XVI. a,b) Less Than Significant. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared for the proposed project, consistent with City requirements. The study analyzed current conditions on City roadways, and predicted future conditions after development of the proposed project. The findings are summarized below. The Analysis in its entirety is available for review at the Planning Department. The TIA used Institute of Transportation Engineers' standards to determine the potential trip generation for the proposed project (including both the theater and the three future building pads). This analysis resulted in a total daily trip generation of approximately 4,842 trip ends. The TIA then distributed traffic onto City streets, based on the City's requirements for trip distribution. The resulting analysis found that the project had the potential to impact 13 -28- roadway intersections, and 20 roadway segments. The TIA found that under existing conditions and opening year with project conditions, all studied intersections operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS), with the exception of the intersection of Washington Street and Lake La Quinta Drive, which operates at LOS F during the AM peak hour. This intersection is planned for a traffic signal as part of an unrelated project. With installation of the traffic signal, the intersection will operate at acceptable LOS during the AM peak hour. The TIA found, as briefly described above, that with the proposed project and scheduled improvements, study area intersections and segments will operate at acceptable LOS. The study also found that several improvements relating to surrounding roadway improvements were recommended. These include: • The installation of dual westbound left turn lanes at La Quinta Center Drive and Highway 111. • Restriping of the southbound approach along La Quinta Center Drive from Highway III to the Lowes/Target driveway to accommodate receiving lanes for the dual westbound left turn lanes. • Installation of an all -way stop at La Quinta Center Drive/Caleo Bay/Avenue 47. In addition, several recommendations associated with direct site access are recommended, including: • Restriping westbound left turn lane on Highway I I I at La Quinta Center Drive to 250 feet. • Extend the existing right turn lane from 155 feet to 250 feet with a transition taper of 150 feet for deceleration lane located on Washington Street, north of Avenue 47. With implementation of the improvements described above, the proposed project is expected to have a less than significant impact on City roadways. c) No Impact. The proposed project is not located within proximity to an airport and will not impact air traffic patterns. d) No Impact. The proposed project is required to meet Specific Plan and Development Code standards for roadway, parking and intersection designs, and is not expected to significantly impact traffic safety. Site -specific circulation and access recommendations are set forth in the Traffic Report conducted for the proposed project, and will be applied as conditions of approval for the project. e) Several roadways in the planning area provide local access. East -west roadways include Highway 111 and 47th Avenue, while Washington Street serves as both the north -south roadway and project access. Emergency access to the site will be from Washington Street and Avenue 47. The property will have adequate emergency access. f) The proposed project will provide the required amount of parking consistent with the Washington Park Specific Plan and the City's Zoning Ordinance. Conformance to these standards will assure that no impacts occur. -29- g) Sunline Transit Agency currently operates bus service on Washington Street and has bus stops in close proximity to the project. Sunline's service is not expected to change, and the public will continue to have access to transit services in the project vicinity. The proposed project will have no impact on alternative modes of transportation. -30- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVIL UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional X Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing X facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or X are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has X adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the X proj ect's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid X waste? XVII. a) No Impact. Wastewater discharge requirements for the Coachella Valley, including the subject property, are administered by the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board. All development within the proposed project will be connected to existing sewer lines in either Washington Street or Avenue 47. Project wastewater will be transported to and processed at CVWD's Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4) in Thermal. CVWD implements all the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board as they relate to wastewater discharge requirements and water quality standards. The proposed project -31- will increase wastewater flows to the treatment plant, but it will not adversely impact water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. b-e) No Impact. The subject property falls under the jurisdiction of the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) for domestic water supplies and wastewater treatment. The project will be able to connect to existing water and sanitary sewer lines in either Washington Street or Avenue 47, and no new regional infrastructure will be required. Wastewater produced by the proposed project will be processed at the Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4) located in Thermal, which has a capacity of approximately 9.5 million gallons per day (mgd). CVWD has prepared an Urban Water Management Plan 2010 Update, which is a long-term planning document that helps it plan for current and future water demands. The Plan demonstrates that the District has available, or can supply, sufficient water to serve the City and the project area. The project will also be required to implement water conservation programs, including a drought tolerant landscaping plan and the CalGreen Building Code, which requires that high efficiency fixtures be used. CVWD is also responsible for regional stormwater management in the Coachella Valley. According to CVWD, the general project area is adequately protected from stormwater flows by the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel (Waitewater River), and drainage issues affecting the subject property are limited to the management of local drainage. The City is responsible for local drainage. To manage onsite stormwater flows, the project proponent will be required to develop a stormwater management plan prior to grading of the project. The City requires that all project retain the 100 year storm on site, and the project will be required to implement this requirement. In addition, the City requires implementation of SWPPP and WQMP to meet NPDES standards. The project will be required to implement both for this project. As a result of the implementation of these standard requirements, it is not anticipated that new or expanded off -site stormwater management facilities will be required to serve the project. fg) No Impact. The project site will be served by Burrtec, the City's solid waste contractor. Trash generated by the project will be hauled to the transfer station located in Cathedral City, west of the City, and from there transported to one of four regional landfills. All four landfills have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project. Burrtec is required to meet all local, regional, State and federal standards for solid waste disposal. -32- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVIII. 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 X 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? X c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when X viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial X adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? a) As discussed in the responses in Sections IV (Biological Resources) and V (Cultural Resources) the project is expected to have less than significant impacts to biological and cultural resources. b,c) Buildout of proposed project is consistent with both the General Plan and Washington Park Specific Plan. The project will not have any additional cumulatively considerable impacts beyond buildout of the General Plan. d) The project's potential environmental effects have been mitigated to a less than significant level by the measures outlined in the Initial Study and development requirements of the City of La Quinta. Further, as proposed the project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. This Agency intends to adopt a Negative Declaration based upon the supporting documentation herein. -33- References City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan City of La Quinta Municipal Code. CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2 -34-