PC Resolution 2023-004 Austin Residence EA 2022-0006PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2023 - 004
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR OUTDOOR
IMPROVEMENTS AT A PRIVATE RESIDENCE LOCATED
AT 77600 AVENIDA FERNANDO
CASE NUMBER: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2022-0006
APPLICANT: PREST VUKSIC GREENWOOD ARCHITECTS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on
February 28, 2023, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Prest
Vuksic Greenwood Architects, on behalf of the Austin family, for outdoor improvements,
including a private tennis court, spa, and other site improvements at 77600 Avenida
Fernando; and
WHEREAS, the Design and Development Department published a public hearing
notice in The Desert Sun newspaper on February 17, 2023 as prescribed by the Municipal
Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of
the site; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning
Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to California
Environmental Quality Act to justify approval of said Environmental Assessment:
1. The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals,
or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory. Potential impacts can be mitigated to be less than significant levels.
2. The proposed project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or
cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in
the immediate vicinity. Potential impacts can be mitigated to be less than
significant.
3. The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect
the human population, either directly or indirectly. Potential impacts can be
mitigated to be less than significant.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2023-004
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2022-0006
PROJECT: AUSTIN RESIDENCE OUTDOOR IMPROVEMENTS
ADOPTED: FEBRUARY 28, 2023
PAGE 2OF2
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 the Planning Commission hereby does adopt Environmental
Assessment 2022-0006 with mitigation measures incorporated [Exhibit A].
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on February 28, 2023, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Caldwell, Guerrero, Hassett, McCune, and
Chairperson Currie
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Nieto and Tyerman
ABSTAIN: None
l RETTA CURRIE, Chairperson
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DANNY CASTRO, Design and Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2023-004
EXHIBIT A
ADOPTED: FEBRUARY 28, 2023
Draft
Austin Residence
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
AND MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PLAN
LeadAgency:
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Prepared by:
The Altum Group
44-600 Village Court, Suite 100
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Is
February 2023
Response to Comments:
California Department offish and Wildlife
Comment # 1: Comment has been noted; no response is necessary under CEQA.
Comment #2: Comment has been noted; no response is necessary under CEQA.
Comment #3: Comment has been noted; no response is necessary under CEQA.
Comment #4: CDFW's revised mitigation measures have been added into the appropriate
sections of the ISMND.
Comment #5: Mitigation Measure BIO-2 has been replaced with the language provided by
CDFW.
Comment #6: Mitigation Measure AES-1 has been replaced with the language provided by
CDFW.
Comment #7: Comment has been noted. Final Project approvals will require the Project's
verified adherence to the City of La Quinta's Water Efficiency regulations.
Comment #8: Comment has been noted. CDFW's recommended edits to Mitigation Measures
AES-1 and BIO-2 have been incorporated into the ISMND.
Comment #9: Comment has been noted; all required forms and reporting will be undertaken by
the City of La Quinta, as appropriate.
Comment #10: Comment has been noted; all required filing fees under CEQA will be paid by
the City of La Quinta, as appropriate.
Comment # 11: Comment has been noted; the City of La Quinta appreciated receiving CDFW's
comments on the Austin Residence ISMND.
2
5 h ..qF ab
State of California — Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor :P .
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTONH. BONHAM, Director
Inland Desert Region~°
�JJ.
3602 Inland Empire Boulevard, Suite C-220
Ontario, CA 91764
www.wildlife.ca.gov
T February 21, 2023
Sent via email
Cheri Flores
Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Austin Residence (PROJECT)
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND)
SCH# 2023020070
Dear Ms. Flores:
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) received a Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) from the City of La Quinta for the Project pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA guidelines'.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding
those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife.
Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects
of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the
exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code.
CDFW ROLE
CDFW is California's Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those
resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State. (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7,
subd. (a) & 1802-1 Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd.
(a).) CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection,
and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically
sustainable populations of those species. (Id., § 1802.) Similarly, for purposes of
CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during
public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related
activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.
CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. (Pub.
Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381.) CDFW expects that it may
'CEQA is codified in the California Public Resources Code in section 21000 et seq. The "CEQA
Guidelines" are found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, commencing with section 15000.
Conserving California's Wifdfife Since 1870
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
February 21, 2023
Page 2
need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As
proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFW's lake and streambed
alteration regulatory authority. (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.) Likewise, to the extent
2 implementation of the Project as proposed may result in "take" as defined by State law
of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish &
G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), the project proponent may seek related take authorization as
provided by the Fish and Game Code.
3
L
Proponent: Prest Vuksic Greenwood Architects
Objective: The Project proposes residential development improvements to the site at
77600 Avenida Fernando in the City of La Quinta. The Project site is designated Open
Space under the City's land use designation. The proposed Project includes a private
tennis court located at the northwest corner of the site and a spa located on the central
eastern portion of the site, just east of the existing pool. The Applicant also proposes
associated site improvements, which include landscaping, utility infrastructure, a seating
area, a boulder water spring, and two lawns —one containing a water feature and a fire
feature. Retention basins would be constructed to collect and store storm runoff
generated during the 100-year design storm per City drainage ordinance requirements.
Location: The Project site is located at 77600 Avenida Fernando in the City of La
Quinta (City), in Riverside County, California. The Project site encompasses APN 658-
170-010 and a portion of APN 658-170-003. The existing property occupies APN 658-
170-011.
Timeframe: Not indicated in the MND
X91TiIJil4LIk%W_1ZIIII :I*991LT, ITT14Z1b7_ I191LIW
CDFW has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish,
wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of
those species (i.e., biological resources). CDFW offers the comments and
recommendations below to assist the City of La Quinta in adequately identifying and/or
mitigating the Project's significant, or potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts
on fish and wildlife (biological) resources. The MND has not adequately identified and
disclosed the Project's impacts (i.e., direct, indirect, and cumulative) on biological
resources and whether those impacts have been mitigated to a level that is less than
significant.
CDFW's comments and recommendations on the MND are explained in greater detail
below and summarized here. CDFW is concerned that the mitigation measure for
nesting birds in the MND is not sufficient in timing and scope to reduce impacts to less
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
February 21, 2023
Page 3
than significant. CDFW is also concerned that the MND lacks a complete and accurate
description of the Project's use of artificial nighttime lighting and that the mitigation
measure for artificial nighttime lightning is inadequate given that the Project is located
4 adjacent to a Conservation Area under the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). CDFW also provides recommendations regarding
landscaping and compliance with the CVMSHCP.
5
1) Nesting Birds
It is the Project proponent's responsibility to comply with all applicable laws related to
nesting birds and birds of prey. Fish and Game Code sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513
afford protective measures as follows: section 3503 states that it is unlawful to take,
possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise
provided by Fish and Game Code or any regulation made pursuant thereto. Fish and
Game Code section 3503.5 makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in
the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds -of -prey) or to take, possess, or destroy
the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by Fish and Game Code
or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto. Fish and Game Code section 3513 makes ii
unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules
and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended (16 U.S.C. § 703 et seq.).
Page 23 of the MND indicates that the Project site has the potential to support nesting
birds given the ornamental vegetation onsite and vegetation in the rocky slopes
adjacent to the site. Although the MND includes Biological Measure 2 (BIO-2) for
nesting birds, the timing and scope are insufficient to ensure that impacts are reduced
to a level less than significant. CDFW recommends that disturbance of occupied nests
of migratory birds and raptors within the Project site be avoided any time birds are
nesting on -site.
To support the Project applicant in avoiding the take of nests, eggs, and nesting birds
any time they are located on -site, CDFW recommends the following changes to
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 for Nesting Birds (with additions in bold and removals in
strikethre irvh):
Mitigation Measure BI0-2: Nesting Birds
Nesting bird surveys shall be performed by a qualified avian biologist no more
than 3 days prior to vegetation removal or ground -disturbing activities. Pre -
construction surveys shall focus on both direct and indirect evidence of
nesting, including nest locations and nesting behavior. The qualified avian
biologist will make every effort to avoid potential nest predation as a result of
survey and monitoring efforts. If active nests are found during the pre -
construction nesting bird surveys, a qualified biologist shall establish an
51
31
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
February 21, 2023
Page 4
appropriate nest buffer to be marked on the ground. Nest buffers are species
specific and shall be at least 300 feet for passerines and 500 feet for raptors. A
smaller or larger buffer may be determined by the qualified biologist familiar
with the nesting phenology of the nesting species and based on nest and
buffer monitoring results. Established buffers shall remain on site until a
qualified biologist determines the young have fledged or the nest is no longer
active. Active nests and adequacy of the established buffer distance shall be
monitored daily by the qualified biologist until the qualified biologist has
determined the young have fledged or the Project has been completed. The
qualified biologist has the authority to stop work if nesting pairs exhibit signs
of disturbance. If i inayeidable Prelent hens+n Un+inn antiyities must begin during the
nesting bird season /Cebruar y 1 S th-ei igh August fist 31 st\e i ia pre _nenstrn+inn nesting
bird survey shall he nonrli anted no more than 14 days prier to ini+ia+inn of grei roll
survey shall be GORdUGted by a bielegist familiar with ideRtifiGatiGR ef aViaR
known to E)GGur OR Riverside GOURty. The ReStiRg bird survey shall be GGRd--t-d
font inside the prnient bpi lRdary innli icing a 300 feet buffer for passerines /snug
birds) and 500 feet buffer fer rapters OR areas ef suitable habitat. 'RaGGessible areas
will he surveyed i icing hinoni Mors to the extent prantinal If nests are found, an
e the prepesed werk aGtiVity,
the eXiStiRg
dosturbaRGes asseGiated with land uses outside of the site) shall be determiRed and
demarGated by the bielegist with bright orange GenstrUGtOGR
e e
rGeRsstrractien lathe or ether means to mark the bpi Rdary r! If a raptor nest. is observe
e
in a tree proposed for removal, MUSt the applinant mst nonsi iI+ with (`DFVV DII
r•nnstrUntion personnel he netified of the existenne of the buffer Znne and to ayend
eRteriRg the buffer ZORe during nesting season. Ne ground disturbiRg aGtiVitieS shall
nnni it within this buffer area Until the avian bielegist has nenfirmed the
breed! ng/ReStiRg OS GOMpleted and the YOURg have fledged. EnGreaGhment onto the
buffer shall OGG it Only at the disnretinn of the qualified hielegis+
2) Artificial Nighttime Lightning
Page 14 of the MND indicates that the tennis court will include 18-foot-tall lights, and
that "all light sources will be designed with internal baffles to direct the lightning towards
the ground and the developed areas and have a zero -side angle cut off to the horizon."
Appendix D of the MND includes a photometric analysis for lightning only associated
with the tennis court. The MND lacks a description of all types of lightning that would be
used by the Project and an analysis of direct and indirect impacts on biological
resources including migratory birds that fly at night, bats, and other nocturnal and
crepuscular wildlife. Available research indicates that artificial nighttime lighting alters
ecological processes including, but not limited to, the temporal niches of species; the
repair and recovery of physiological function; the measurement of time through
interference with the detection of circadian and lunar and seasonal cycles; and the
R
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
February 21, 2023
Page 5
detection of resources and natural enemies and navigation 2. Further, many of the
effects of artificial nighttime lightning on population or ecosystem -level processes are
still poorly known.
CDFW is concerned that without a complete and accurate description of the Project's
artificial nighttime lighting, the MND likely provides an incomplete or inaccurate analysis
of Project -related environmental impacts and whether those impacts have been
mitigated to a level that is less than significant. CDFW recommends that the MND is
updated to include lightning specifications for all artificial nighttime lightning that will be
used by the Project, an analysis of the direct and indirect impacts of artificial nighttime
lighting on biological resources, and avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures
that will reduce impacts to less than significant.
Although the MND includes Mitigation Measure AES-1, it is insufficient in scope to
protect biological resources including migratory birds that fly at night, bats, and other
nocturnal and crepuscular wildlife. CDFW recommends the following changes to
Mitigation Measure AES-1 (with additions in bold and removals in strikethro unh):
Mitigation Measure AES-1: Artificial Nighttime Lighting
During Project construction and long-term operation, the Project shall
eliminate all nonessential lighting throughout the Project area and avoid or
limit the use of artificial light during the hours of dawn and dusk when
many wildlife species are most active. Ensure that all lighting for Project is
fully shielded, cast downward, reduced in intensity to the greatest extent,
and does not result in lighting trespass including glare onto other
properties —including any areas of the adjacent Santa Rosa and San
Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area —or upward into the night sky (see
the International Dark -Sky Association standards at http://darksky.org/).
Use LED lighting with a correlated color temperature of 3,000 Kelvins or
less, properly dispose of hazardous waste, and recycle lighting that
contains toxic compounds with a qualified recycler. The Dreier+ developer
away from the mountainside and intothe property so that the s irrei' g
renQeryatlerl area is net imPanted by Unnatural light see irnec
7 T 3) Landscaping
2 Gatson, K. J., Bennie, J., Davies, T., Hopkins, J. The ecological impacts of nighttime light pollution: a
mechanistic appraisal. Biological Reviews, 2013.
7
0
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
February 21, 2023
Page 6
The MND includes limited details on landscaping plans for the Project. To ameliorate
the water demands of this Project, CDFW recommends incorporation of water -wise
concepts in project landscape design plans. In particular, CDFW recommends
xeriscaping with locally native California species and installing water -efficient and
targeted irrigation systems (such as drip irrigation). Native plants support butterflies,
birds, reptiles, amphibians, small mammals, bees, and other pollinators that evolved
with those plants, more information on native plants suitable for the Project location and
nearby nurseries is available at CALSCAPE: https://calscape.org/. Local water
agencies/districts and resource conservation districts in your area may be able to
provide information on plant nurseries that carry locally native species, and some
facilities display drought -tolerant locally native species demonstration gardens.
Information on drought -tolerant landscaping and water -efficient irrigation systems is
available on California's Save our Water website: https://saveourwater.com/. In addition,
Section 4.0 of the CVMSHCP includes "Table 4-112: Coachella Valley Native Plants
Recommended for Landscaping" (pp. 4-180 to 4-182;
https://cvmshcD.ora/Plan Documents.htm).
4) Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
Within the Inland Deserts Region, CDFW issued Natural Community Conservation Plan
Approval and Take Authorization for the CVMSHCP per Section 2800, et seq., of the
California Fish and Game Code on September 9, 2008. The CVMSHCP establishes a
multiple species conservation program to minimize and mitigate habitat loss and
provides for the incidental take of covered species in association with activities covered
under the permit.
Compliance with approved habitat plans, such as the CVMSHCP, is discussed in
CEQA. Specifically, Section 15125(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the CEQA
document discuss any inconsistencies between a proposed Project and applicable
general plans and regional plans, including habitat conservation plans and natural
community conservation plans. An assessment of the impacts to the CVMSHCP as a
result of this Project is necessary to address CEQA requirements. To obtain additional
information regarding the CVMSHCP please go to: http://www.cvmshcp.org/.
The Project occurs within and adjacent to the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains
Conservation Area and is subject to the provisions and policies of the CVMSHCP,
including the Joint Project Review (JPR) process through the Coachella Valley
Conservation Commission (CVCC). The City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency and a
signatory to the Implementing Agreement and Permittee of the CVMSHCP. To be
considered a covered activity under the CVMSHCP, Permittees should demonstrate
that proposed actions are consistent with the CVMSHCP and its associated
Implementing Agreement. The Conservation Objectives for Santa Rosa and San Jacinto
Mountains Conservation Area are identified in Section 4.3.21 of the CVMSHCP. The
MND should demonstrate how the proposed Project is consistent with the Conservation
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
February 21, 2023
Page 7
Objectives and Required Measure (as identified in CVMSHP Section 4.3.21), and
address any applicable Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures (CVMSHCP
Section 4.4) and Land Use Adjacency Guidelines (CVMSHCP Section 4.5).
The JPR process has been completed by CVCC for the Project. In the MND, Mitigation
8 Measure BIO-1 addresses fencing plans and the Project's consistency with Required
Measure 11 of CVMSHP Section 4.3.21. Mitigation Measure AES-1 discusses plans for
artificial nighttime lighting given the Project's location adjacent to the Santa Rosa and
San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area. To be consistent with Land Use Adjacency
Guidelines (CVMSHCP Section 4.5), CDFW recommends changes to Mitigation
Measure AES-1, which are discussed in the Artificial Nighttime Lightning section of this
comment letter.
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and
negative declarations be incorporated into a database which may be used to make
subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations. (Pub. Resources Code, §
9 21003, subd. (e).) Accordingly, please report any special status species and natural
communities detected during Project surveys to the California Natural Diversity
Database (CNDDB). The CNNDB field survey form can be filled out and submitted
online at the following link: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Submitting-Data. The
types of information reported to CNDDB can be found at the following link:
https://www.wildlife.ca.aov/Data/CNDDB/Plants-and-Animals.
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT FILING FEES
The Project, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment
of environmental document filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the
10 Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of
environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the environmental document filing fee is
required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final.
(Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & G. Code, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, §
21089.)
CONCLUSIONS
CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the MND to assist the City of La
Quinta in identifying and mitigating Project impacts to biological resources. CDFW
1 1 concludes that the MND does not adequately identify or mitigate the Project's
significant, or potentially significant, impacts to biological resources, including nesting
birds and wildlife impacted by artificial nighttime lighting. CDFW recommends that prior
to adoption of the MND, the City of La Quinta revise the document to include a more
complete assessment of the Project's potential impacts on biological resources, as well
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
February 21, 2023
Page 8
as appropriate avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a
level that is less than significant.
CDFW personnel are available for consultation regarding biological resources and
strategies to minimize impacts. Questions regarding this letter or further coordination
should be directed to Jacob Skaggs, Environmental Scientist, at
0acob.skaggs(a-).wildlife.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
E
DocuSigne,•d .by':
84F92FFEEFD24C8...
Kim Freeburn
Environmental Program Manager
Attachment 1: MMRP for CDFW-Proposed Mitigation Measures
ec:
Heather Brashear, Senior Environmental Scientist (Supervisor), CDFW
Heather. Brashear(a)Wildlife.ca.gov
Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, Sacramento
state. clearinghouse opr.ca. gov
Rollie White, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
rollie whiteCa)_fws.gov
Vincent James, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
vincentJames fws.gov
ATTACHMENT 1: MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
12 Mitigation Measures Timing and Responsible
Methods Parties
12
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
February 21, 2023
Page 9
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Nesting Birds
Nesting bird surveys shall be performed by a
qualified avian biologist no more than 3 days
prior to vegetation removal or ground -disturbing
activities. Pre -construction surveys shall focus
on both direct and indirect evidence of nesting,
including nest locations and nesting behavior.
The qualified avian biologist will make every
effort to avoid potential nest predation as a result
of survey and monitoring efforts. If active nests
are found during the pre -construction nesting
bird surveys, a qualified biologist shall establish
an appropriate nest buffer to be marked on the
ground. Nest buffers are species specific and
shall be at least 300 feet for passerines and 500
feet for raptors. A smaller or larger buffer may be
determined by the qualified biologist familiar with
the nesting phenology of the nesting species and
based on nest and buffer monitoring results.
Established buffers shall remain on site until a
qualified biologist determines the young have
fledged or the nest is no longer active. Active
nests and adequacy of the established buffer
distance shall be monitored daily by the qualified
biologist until the qualified biologist has
determined the young have fledged or the Project
has been completed. The qualified biologist has
the authority to stop work if nesting pairs exhibit
signs of disturbance. If URa„ei.dable oroien+
nn RstrUn+inn an+niities must begiR d iriRg the Resting
Timing: No more
than three days
prior to vegetation
removal or
ground -disturbing
activities
Methods: See
Mitigation
Measure
Implementation:
Project applicant
Monitoring and
Reporting: City of La
Quinta
hinds R (February 111 +hreugh August 31 s+)a
nre_nn Rs+rl in+inn nesting bird survey shall be
nnRrdi ln+ed n mGre +haR 14 .days n r to iRi+ia+inn of
groi 1Rd disc urba Rne and vegetation removal an+nii+iec
The Resting n Rs+rUn+inn bird shall be
survey
conducted by a biologist familiar with identification of
avian species known to occur On Riverside County.
The nesting bird survey shall he conducted on font
inside the
boundary, including a 300 foot
project
er
buffer for (song birds) and 500_font h ffe.
passerines
for ran+ors OR of suitable habitat. IRaccessible
areas
will he g biRnn� �lars to the eXteRt
areas surveyed
If foUR.d aR a eirlaRce buffer
practical Rests are
(dGPGRd8R+ s the n ed ac+iyity,
UPGR work
the a is+iRg disc urbaRces a is+ed with IaRrd
uses
A-1-IicSO(de of the site) shall he .de+ermiRed aRrd
demarcated by the biologist with bright orange
lathe or
construction fencing flaggin�g
_construction
other means to marls the boundary. If a ranter nest 'c
observed On a tree for removal the
proposed
12
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
February 21, 2023
Page 10
Personnel he notifiedof+he evis+enne of the h, iffer
nd teavoid entering the buffer
during
zone
zene
Ne g nd disturbing aGtivities shall
Resting seaSeR.
ngnUr this h- iffer aa. until the bielegist
within
avian
has oenfirmed the breeding/nesting is and
GeMnlete.d
the have fledged Enoreaohment into the buffer
young
shall o my at the rlisoretien of the
qualified
biologist.
Mitigation Measure AES-1: Artificial Nighttime
Lighting
During Project construction and long-term
operation, the Project shall eliminate all
nonessential lighting throughout the Project
area and avoid or limit the use of artificial
light during the hours of dawn and dusk when
many wildlife species are most active. Ensure
that all lighting for Project is fully shielded,
cast downward, reduced in intensity to the
greatest extent, and does not result in lighting
trespass including glare onto other
properties —including any areas of the
adjacent Santa Rosa and San Jacinto
Mountains Conservation Area —or upward
into the night sky (see the International Dark -
Sky Association standards at
http://darksky.org/). Use LED lighting with a
correlated color temperature of 3,000 Kelvins
or less, properly dispose of hazardous waste,
and recycle lighting that contains toxic
compounds with a qualified recycler. T44e
❑rgle Gt developer shall that all ambient
Timing: During
Project
construction and
long-term
operation.
Methods: See
Mitigation
Measure
Implementation:
Project applicant
Monitoring and
Reporting: City of La
Quinta
ensure
lighting of lanrlsoane feat-. are oriented faring
frem the m and into the n ert�i
untaipsi.Je
away
se that the s n.iing o 4a+inn a of
imnaoted by U oat Ural lightsewres
Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
Responsibility And
Implementation
Environmental Impact
Mitigation Measure
Timing
Monitoring
3.1 Aesthetics
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
Mitigation Measure:
Implementation: City
Confirm that all
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
AES-1: During Project construction and
of La Quinta
non essential
views in the area?
long-term operation, the Project shall
Department of Design
lighting has been
eliminate all nonessential lighting
and Development
eliminated and
throughout the Project area and avoid or
(Building Division /
that all ambient
limit the use of artificial light during the
Planning Division).
lighting are
hours of dawn and dusk when many
wildlife species are most active. Ensure
Timing: Prior to issuance
shielded, reduced
that all lighting for Project is fully
of any construction permit
in intensity and
shielded, cast downward, reduced in
cast downward.
intensity to the greatest extent, and does
not result in lighting trespass including
Initials: Date:
glare onto other properties —including any
areas of the adjacent Santa Rosa and San
Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area —or
upward into the night sky (see the
International Dark -Sky Association
standards at http://darksky.org/). Use LED
lighting with a correlated color
temperature of 3,000 Kelvins or less,
properly dispose of hazardous waste, and
recycle lighting that contains toxic
compounds with a qualified recycler.
3.4 Biological Resources
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
Mitigation Measure:
Implementation: City
Confirm that
or through habitat modifications, on any species
BIO-1: The Project developer shall ensure
of La Quinta
technical
identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status
the installation of Peninsular bighorn
Department of Design
assessment has
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
sheep (PBS) fence, either at project
and Development
been submitted
regulations, or by the California Department of
buildout or through granting to Coachella
(Building Division /
and identified
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Valley Conservation Commission an
Planning Division).
measures are
Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
easement for the future construction of
incorporated into
such fence, and further, that if an easement
Timing: Prior to
construction
is to be granted, it shall be recorded prior
issuance of any
to the issuance of any grading permits.
grading permit.
Initials:
Upon recordation of a fence easement and
Date:
establishment of a financial instrument (or
_
plans for fence construction at the time of
project buildout), as well as revision of the
lighting plan (outlined in Mitigation
Measure AES-1), this Project may be
considered fully consistent with
CVMSHCP. If, during subsequent review
of the Project, it is significantly from those
reviewed in the Joint Project Review
(including a fence alignment above the toe
of slope), this consistency determination
shall be rendered null and void.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
Mitigation Measure:
Implementation: City
Confirm that
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
BIO-2 Nesting bird surveys shall be
of La Quinta
technical
species or with established native resident or
performed by a qualified avian biologist
Department of Design
assessment has
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
no more than 3 days prior to vegetation
and Development
been submitted
native wildlife nursery sites?
removal or ground -disturbing activities.
(Building Division /
and identified
Pre -construction surveys shall focus on
Y
Planning Division).
both direct and indirect evidence of
measures are
nesting, including nest locations and
incorporated into
nesting behavior. The qualified avian
Timin Prior to
g'
construction
biologist will make every effort to avoid
issuance of any
documents.
potential nest predation as a result of
grading permit.
survey and monitoring efforts. If active
nests are found during the pre -
construction nesting bird surveys, a
qualified biologist shall establish an
appropriate nest buffer to be marked on
the ground. Nest buffers are species
specific and shall be at least 300 feet for
passerines and 500 feet for raptors. A
smaller or larger buffer may be determined
by the qualified biologist familiar with the
nesting henolo of the nesting species
Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
and based on nest and buffer monitoring
results. Established buffers shall remain on
site until a qualified biologist determines
the young have fledged or the nest is no
longer active. Active nests and adequacy of
the established buffer distance shall be
monitored daily by the qualified biologist
until the qualified biologist has determined
the young have fledged or the Project has
been completed. The qualified biologist
has the authority to stop work if nesting
airs exhibit signs of disturbance.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Mitigation Measure:
Implementation: City
Confirm that
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
BIO-3 The applicant shall pay the
of La Quinta
technical
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation
Department of Design lm
assessment has
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Fee prior to building permit issuance.
and Development
been submitted
(Building Division /
and identified
Planning Division).
measures are
incorporated into
Timing: Prior to
construction
issuance of any
documents.
grading permit.
3.5 Cultural Resources
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
Mitigation Measure:
Implementation: City
Confirm that
significance of a historical resource as defined in §
CUL-1: A qualified archaeologist monitor
of La Quinta
technical assessment
15064.5?
shall be present during any ground
Department of Design
has been submitted
disturbing activities during the project
and Development
and identified
construction phase. In the case that
(Building Division /
measures are
archaeological materials are encountered
Planning Division).
incorporated into
during ground disturbing activities, all
construction.
work within 50 feet of the discovery shall
Timing: Prior to
cease and any deposits shall be treated
issuance of any
Initials:
according to federal, State, and local
grading permit.
Date: _
guidelines. No further grading is
permitted in the area of the discovery until
the City approves the appropriate measure
to protect the discovered resources.
Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
Mitigation Measure:
Implementation: City
Confirm that
significance of an archaeological resource
CUL-2 In the event that human remains
of La Quinta
technical assessment
pursuant to § 15064.5?
are uncovered during ground disturbing
Department of Design
has been submitted
activities on the project site, no further
and Development
and identified
disturbances shall occur and all work shall
(Building Division /
measures are
cease until the County Coroner has made a
Planning Division).
incorporated into
determination of the origin and
construction.
disposition of the remains. Ground
Timing: Prior to
disturbing activities and excavations shall
issuance of any
Initials:
not resume until the County Coroner has
grading permit.
Date:
been contacted and determined that no
investigation to the cause of death is
required. If the County Coroner must
notify Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC), which will then
determine the Most Likely Descendant
(MLD). The MLD shall complete the
inspection of the site within 48 hours of
notification and may recommend means of
treating or disposing of, with appropriate
dignity, the human remains, and any
associated grave goods as provided in
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
3.7 Geology and Soils
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
Mitigation Measure:
Implementation: City
Confirm that
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
GEO-1 Prior to the start of the proposed
of La Quinta
technical assessment
feature?
project activities, all field personnel will
Department of Design
has been submitted
receive a worker's environmental
and Development
and identified
awareness training on paleontological
(Building Division /
measures are
resources. The training will provide a
Planning Division).
incorporated into
description of the laws and ordinances
construction.
protecting fossil resources, the types of
Timing: Prior to
fossil resources that mat be encountered in
issuance of any
Initials: _ Date:
the protected area, the role of the
grading permit.
paleontological monitor, outline steps to
follow in the event that a fossil discovery
is made, and provide contact information
Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
for the project paleontologist. The training
will be developed by the project
paleontologist and can be delivered
concurrent with other training including
cultural, biological, safety, etc.
Mitigation Measure:
GEO-2 Prior to the commencement of
ground -disturbing activities, a
professional paleontologist will be
retained to prepare and implement a
PRMMP for the proposed project. The
PRMMP will describe the monitoring
required during excavations that extend
into older Quaternary (Pleistocene) age
sediments, and the location of areas
deemed to have a high paleontological
resource potential. Part-time monitoring,
on spot checking, may be required during
shallow ground -disturbances (<10 feet
below ground surface) to confirm that
sensitive geologic units are not being
impacted. Monitoring will entail the visual
inspection of excavated or graded areas
and trench sidewalls.
Mitigation Measure:
GEO-3 In the event that a paleontological
resource is discovered, the monitor will
have the authority to temporarily divert
the construction equipment around the
find until it is assessed for scientific
significance and, if appropriate, collected.
If the resource is determined to be of
scientific significance, the project
paleontologist shall complete the
following:
1. Salvage of Fossils. If fossils are
discovered, all work in the immediate
vicinity should be halted to allow the
paleontological monitor, and/or
project paleontologist to evaluate the
Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
discovery and determine if the fossil
may be considered significant. If the
fossils are determined to be
potentially significant, the project
paleontologist (or paleontological
monitor) should recover them
following standard field procedures
for collecting paleontological as
outlined in the PRMMP prepared for
the project. Typically, fossils can be
safely salvaged quickly by a single
paleontologist and not disrupt
construction activity. In some cases,
larger fossils (such as complete
skeletons or large mammal fossils)
require more extensive excavation
and longer salvage periods. In this
case the paleontologist should have
the authority to temporarily direct,
divert or halt construction activity to
ensure that the fossil(s) can be
removed in a safe and timely manner.
2. Fossil Preparation and Curation. The
PRMMP will identify the museum
that has agreed to accept fossils that
may be discovered during project -
related excavations. Upon completion
of fieldwork, all significant fossils
collected will be prepared in a
properly equipped laboratory to a
point ready for curation. Preparation
may include the removal of excess
matrix from fossil materials and
stabilizing or repairing specimens.
During preparation and inventory,
the fossils specimens will be identified
to the lowest taxonomic level practical
prior to curation at an accredited
museum. The fossilspecimens must
Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
be delivered to the accredited
museum or repository no later than 90
days after all fieldwork is completed.
The cost of curation will be assessed
by the repository and will be the
responsibility of the client.
Mitigation Measure:
GE04 Upon completion of ground
disturbing activity (and curation of fossils
if necessary) the project paleontologist
shall prepare s final mitigation and
monitoring report outlining the results of
the mitigation and monitoring program.
The report shall include discussion of the
location, duration and methods of the
monitoring, strategic sections, any
recovered fossils, and the scientific
significance of those fossils, and where
fossils were curated.
3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Mitigation Measure:
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
TRI-1 Should human remains be
register of historical resources as defined in Public
discovered during construction of the
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
proposed project, the project contractor
would be subject to either the State law
regarding the discovery and disturbance
of human remains or the Tribal burial
protocol. In either circumstance all
destructive activity in the immediate
vicinity shall halt and the County Coroner
shall be contacted pursuant to State Health
and Safety Code §7050.5. If the remains are
determined to be of Native American
origin, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted.
The NAHC will make a determination of
the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The
City and Developer will work with the
Table 4.0.1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
designated MLD to determine the final
disposition of the remains.
Mitigation Measure:
TRI-2 Should cultural resources be found
during construction, work should be
stopped until a qualified archeologist can
evaluate the find and the Tribe has been
contacted.
Draft
Austin Residence
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
EA2022-0004
Lead Agency:
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Prepared by:
The Altum Group
44-600 Village Court, Suite 100
Palm Desert, CA 92260
MIS
REVISED
February 2023
Revisions underlined.
Table of Contents
Chapter1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 1
1.1
Overview...............................................................................................................................
1
1.2
Authority...............................................................................................................................1
1.3
Scope of Environmental Review............................................................................................ 1
1.4
Impact Assessment Terminology........................................................................................... 2
1.5
Organization of the Initial Study............................................................................................ 2
1.6
Documents Incorporated by Reference................................................................................ 2
Chapter
2 Project Description......................................................................................................... 4
2.1
Project Location and Setting................................................................................................. 4
2.2
Project Description................................................................................................................
4
2.3
Project -Related Approvals..................................................................................................... 5
Chapter
3 Environmental Evaluation............................................................................................
12
3.1
Aesthetics............................................................................................................................13
3.2
Agriculture and Forestry Resources....................................................................................
15
3.3
Air Quality...........................................................................................................................
17
3.4
Biological Resources............................................................................................................
19
3.5
Cultural Resources..............................................................................................................
25
3.6
Energy.................................................................................................................................
28
3.7
Geology and Soils................................................................................................................
29
3.8
Greenhouse Gas Emissions.................................................................................................
34
3.9
Hazards and Hazardous Materials.......................................................................................
35
3.10
Hydrology and Water Quality..........................................................................................
38
3.11
Land Use and Planning....................................................................................................
40
3.12
Mineral Resources...........................................................................................................
42
3.13
Noise................................................................................................................................43
3.14
Population and Housing...................................................................................................
45
3.15
Public Services.................................................................................................................
46
3.16
Recreation.......................................................................................................................
48
Austin Residence IS/MND ii February 2023
3.17 Transportation.................................................................................................................49
3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources................................................................................................. 50
3.19 Utilities and Services........................................................................................................ 52
3.20 Wildfire............................................................................................................................54
3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance................................................................................. 56
Chapter 4 Report Preparers.......................................................................................................... 59
List of Tables
Table 1 Surrounding Land Uses.......................................................................................................... 4
List of Exhibits
Exhibit1
Regional Map..................................................................................................................... 6
Exhibit2
Vicinity Map.......................................................................................................................
7
Exhibit3
Site Plan.............................................................................................................................
8
Exhibit4
Viewshed Study A..............................................................................................................
9
Exhibit5
Viewshed Study B............................................................................................................
10
Exhibit6
Toe of Slope Map.............................................................................................................
11
Appendix
Appendix A Biological Resources Report for the Austin Residence Project Located in the City of La
Quinta, Riverside County, California, ELMT Consulting, January 12, 2022.
Appendix B Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Assessor's Parcel Numbers 658-
170-003 and -010, CRM TECH, March 28, 2022.
Appendix C Austin Residence Toe of Slope Exhibit, 77-600 Avenida Fernando, La Quinta, CA 92253,
Essi Engineering, September 30, 2021.
Appendix D Tennis Court Photometric Austin Residence, 77-600 Avenida Fernando, La Quinta, CA
92253, HSA Design Group, April 20, 2022.
Austin Residence IS/MND iii February 2023
Acronyms
AB
Assembly Bill
AMSL
Above Mean Sea Level
APN
Assessor's Parcel Number
ACBCI
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
AQMP
Air Quality Management Plan
BMPs
Best Management Practices
CA EPA
California Environmental Protection Agency
CaIEEMod
California Emissions Estimator Model
CALGreen
California Green Building Standards
Caltrans
California Department of Transportation
CAP
Climate Action Plan
CARB
California Air Resources Board
CBC
California Building Code
CCR
California Code of Regulations
CDC
California Department of Conservation
CDFW
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA
California Environmental Quality Act
CERCLA
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CFC
Chlorofluorocarbons
CH4
Methane
CNEL
Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNPS
California Native Plant Society
CO
Carbon Monoxide
COz
Carbon Dioxide
CVMSHCP
Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
CVWD
Coachella Valley Water District
dB
Decibel
dBA
A -weighted decibels
DSUSD
Desert Sands Unified School District
DTSC
California Department of Toxic Substances Control
DU/AC
Dwelling Unit per Acre
e.g.
Exempli gratia which means "for example"
EIC
Eastern Information Center
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
FTA
Federal Transit Administration
GHG
Greenhouse Gas
In/sec
Inches per second
IS
Initial Study
Austin Residence IS/MND iv February 2023
ITE
Institute of Engineers
Lbs/day
Pounds per Day
Leq
Equivalent Continuous Sound Pressure Level
LST
Localized Significance Threshold
Mgd
Million gallons per day
MILD
Most Likely Descendant
MMTCOze
Million Metric Tons of CO2 Emitted
MRZ-3
Mineral Resources Zone 3
MWD
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
N20
Nitrous Oxides
NAHC
Native American Heritage Commission
NO
Nitric Oxide
NO2
Nitrogen Dioxide
NOx
Nitrogen Oxide
NPDES
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
PDPD
Palm Desert Police Department
PM
Particulate Matter
PMlo
Particulate Matter Equal to or less than 10 Microns in Diameter
PM2.5
Particulate Matter Equal to or less than 2.5 Microns in Diameter
PPM
Parts per Million
PPV
Peak Particle Velocities
PRC
Public Resources Code
PSI
Pounds per square inch
PSUSD
Palm Springs Unified School District
RCALUC
Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission
RCFD
Riverside County Fire Department
RCRA
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCS/SCS
Regional Transportation/Sustainable Communities Strategy
RMS
Root Mean Square
RTP
Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB
Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB
Senate Bill
SCAB
South Coast Air Basin
SCAG
Southern California Associations of Government
SCAQMD
South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCE
Southern California Edison
SCS
Sustainable Communities Strategy
SIP
State Implementation Plan
S02
Sulfur dioxide
Austin Residence IS/MND v February 2023
SoCal Gas
Southern California Gas
SOI
Sphere -of -Influence
SRA
Source Receptor Area
SRA
State Responsibility Area
SSAB
Salton Sea Air Basin
STC
Sound Transmission Class
SWPPP
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
UCR
University of Riverside
USACE
United States Army Corps of Engineers
UWMP
Urban Water Management Plan
VdB
Vibration decibels
VMT
Vehicle Miles Traveled
WMP
Water Management Plan
WQMP
Water Quality Management Plan
WRP 10
Wastewater Treatment Plant 10
Austin Residence IS/MND vi February 2023
This page intentionally left blank.
Austin Residence IS/MND vii February 2023
1 INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Overview
Prest Vuksic Greenwood Architects (hereafter, "Applicant") is proposing to develop the Austin Residence
Project (hereafter, "Project"), which will add a private tennis court, spa grotto, and landscaping to the existing
Austin residence at 77600 Avenida Fernando in the City of La Quinta (City), in Riverside County, California. The
construction of the new tennis court, spa grotto, and landscaping will take place on Assessor Parcel Numbers
(APNs) 658-170-010 (0.91 acres) and a portion of 658-170-003 (4.14 acres). The existing residence is located
on APN 658-170-011(0.85 acres). The project site is bordered by mountain slopes to the north and east, vacant
land and an existing residence to the west, and Avenida Fernando to the south.
The proposed Project will require a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit to allow for the
development of a private tennis court and spa grotto and associated improvements.
1.2 Authority
The City of La Quinta is the lead agency for the proposed Project. The City Council is the governing body for
the approval of the Project and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Because the Project involves
a change to the existing site, the City Council's consideration of the Project and its potential environmental
effects is a discretionary action that is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This
Subsequent Initial Study (IS) and its appendices have been prepared in accordance with CEQA (Statute), the
State's Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (Guidelines) (as amended, 2018), and the City's CEQA
Guidelines for preparation of an IS. This IS, when combined with the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration, serves as the environmental document for the proposed Project pursuant to the
provisions of CEQA (Public Resources Code 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of
Regulations Section 15000, et seq.).
1.3 Scope of Environmental Review
The IS evaluates the proposed Project's potential environmental impacts on the following topics:
• Aesthetics
• Agricultural and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology/Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards/Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology/Water Quality
• Land Use/Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population/Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Transportation
• Tribal Cultural Resources
• Utilities/Service Systems
• Wildfire
• Mandatory Findings of Significance
Austin Residence IS/MND 1 February 2023
1 INTRODUCTION
1.4 Impact Assessment Terminology
The Environmental Checklist identifies potential impacts using four levels of significance as follows:
• No Impact. A finding of no impact is made when it is clear from the analysis that the proposed Project
would not affect the environment.
• Less than Significant. A finding of less than significant is made when it is clear from the analysis that
the proposed Project would cause no substantial adverse change in the environment and no mitigation
is required.
• Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. A finding of less than significant with mitigation
incorporated is made when it is clear from the analysis that the proposed Project would cause no
substantial adverse change in the environment when mitigation measures are successfully
implemented by the project proponent.
• Potentially Significant. A finding of potentially significant is made when the analysis concludes that the
proposed Project could have a substantially adverse impact on the environment related to one or more
of the topics listed in the previous section, Scope of the Initial Study.
1.5 Organization of the Initial Study
The content and format of this IS meet the requirements of CEQA. This IS contains the following sections:
• Chapter 1 Introduction. This chapter provides a brief summary of the proposed Project, identifies the
lead agency, summarizes the purpose and scope of the IS, and identifies documents incorporated by
reference.
• Chapter 2 Project Description. This chapter provides a Project overview including a description of the
regional location and Project vicinity, including exhibits; and provides a description of the Project
elements, e.g., dimensions of the Project, and identifies other agencies that may have permitting
authority over the Project.
• Chapter 3 Environmental Checklist. This chapter provides a copy of the City's Environmental Checklist
and responses to each question posed in the checklist. This chapter also provides a brief description of
the sources used to evaluate the proposed Project, a brief description of the existing conditions for
each topic and an analysis of potential environmental impacts. Mitigation measures are also identified
where necessary.
• Chapter 4 List of Preparers. This chapter identifies City staff and consultants who were responsible for
the preparation of the IS and implementation of the Project.
1.6 Documents Incorporated by Reference
As allowed by CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, a Mitigated Negative Declaration may incorporate by reference
all or portions of another document that is generally available to the public. The document used must be
available for public review for interested parties to access during public review of the Subsequent Initial Study
and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this Project. The following documents are
incorporated by reference.
• City of La Quinta General Plan
• Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2010111094) for the City of La Quinta General Plan
Austin Residence IS/MND 2 February 2023
1 INTRODUCTION
These documents are also available for review at the La Quinta City Hall at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta,
CA 92253. The Project specific reports are attached to the Subsequent Initial Study as appendices. The General
Plan is located on the City's website at: https://www.laguintaca.gov/business/design-and-
development/planning-division/2035-la-guinta-general-plan.
Austin Residence IS/MND 3 February 2023
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Chapter 2 Project Description
2.1 Project Location and Setting
As detailed in Exhibit 2-1 Regional Location, and Exhibit 2-2, Project Vicinity, the Project site is located at 77600
Avenida Fernando in the City of La Quinta (City), in Riverside County, California. The Project site encompasses
APN 658-170-010 and a portion of APN 658-170-003. The existing property occupies APN 658-170-011.
Existing General Plan Designation
The Project site is designated as "Natural Open Space" under the City's General Plan 2035 Land Use Map. The
Natural Open Space designation permits little development. Ephemeral streams, manmade flood control
channels and the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel are designated Natural Open Space. Lands purchased
by conservation organizations for the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan can be
included in this designation.
Existing Zoning Designation
The Project site is zoned "Open Space (OS)" and within the Hillside Conservation (HC) Overlay Area" per the
City's Official Zoning Map. Per the City's Municipal Code Section 9.110.050, the purpose of the "OS" zoning
designation is to provide for the protection and preservation of sensitive environmental areas such as areas
with significant cultural resources, threatened or endangered plant and wildlife species habitat, scenic
resources, and significant topographical constraints. Per Section 9.110.070, the purpose of the HC Overlay is
to ensure safe development that would provide minimal disturbance of the existing terrain and natural habitat,
and that the natural hillside characteristics will be retained wherever practicable.
Surrounding Land Uses
The Project site is bordered by Avenida Fernando, followed by the La Quinta Resort; mountain slopes are
located immediately to the north and east; and an existing residence to the west. See Table 1, Surrounding
Land Uses, for the existing General Plan land use and zoning designations surrounding the property.
Table 1 Surrounding Land Uses
Direction
General Plan Designation
Zoning
Existing Land Use
North
Open Space — Natural
Open Space
Mountain slope
South
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Austin residence
East
Open Space — Natural
Open Space
Mountain slope
West
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Single-family residential home
2.2 Project Description
As shown in both Exhibit 2-3, Site Plan, the proposed Project involves residential development improvements
in the Open Space land use designation and zone, including a private tennis court located at the northwest
corner of the site and a spa located on the central eastern portion of the site, just east of the existing pool. The
Applicant also proposes associated site improvements, which include landscaping, utility infrastructure, a
seating area, a boulder water spring, and two lawns — one containing a water feature and a fire feature.
Retention basins would be constructed to the east and north of the proposed tennis court and
south/southwest of the proposed spa site, to collect and store storm runoff generated during the 100-year
design storm per City of La Quinta drainage ordinance requirements.
Austin Residence IS/MND 4 February 2023
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.3 Project -Related Approvals
The discretionary approvals required by the City include:
• Conditional Use Permit 2022-0004
• Site Development Permit 2022-0005
• Adoption of Austin Residence IS/MND (EA2022-0006)
Austin Residence IS/MND 5 February 2023
1 in = 5.17 miles
The
El S Altum
Group
Regional Map
Austin Residence
Exhibit
IP0-rt U UbV
L aaLaVo
Y .N
f1j Bermuda Dunes,
N Country Club
a I 4;mE) e s e
-.W Fred,Waring r IF
-re--, 'S PFre red Waring
x5l;
n -.VVe I I
Cour
min 411 p
Falls
r
itam
.4 ours
* _H
Indian Wells
-Country Club rTwenty-Nine
#L
Zi
c r7
0
E. — Avenue 48 Avenue 48
CIO)
0
ca
F
U
-a Quinta - *!F,
--, 11 -, " 1l;
ti Country Club" rf
T
Avenue —Avenue 50 4 -50th
0. 50th Ave
0
-JI
La Quinta cn
4:
Resort & Club i I Mountain View COE
'La Quinta Country Club
'Avenue 52
Avenue.52 52nd.Ave —
4
1z:
ilve r c -011 L)
Tradition Golf
Club Course
E"
4 _�� Hideaway Golf Madison Club'
Ind
Club
A
Pi
C
03
m
x
LT
r+
0
M
z z
CZ
El
iN
tTl
----------------------------------
xm
----------------------------
o
ev
seer
---- ------
-AMAN
f RLZONE OSZONE —
PROPOSED TENNIS '
• COURT
EXISTNG MOUNTAIN
ammm combs
LINE 7SIGHT
PROPOSED SPA
PLAN VIEW - NTS
Ell
IRA
I
PROPERTY LINE RL ZONE I OS ZONE — —
i I i
i
LINE OF SIGHT (VIEW TO PEAK) _
AVENIDA FERNANDO LINE OF SIGHT EXISTING MOUNTAIN SIDE PROPERTY LINE
i I i
PROPOSED SPA
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION A - NTS
AUSTIN RESIDENCE VIEWSHED ANALYSIS
DATE: June 13, 2022
✓OB NO.
The 44-600 Village Court, Ste.100
AltumPalm Desert, CA 92260
t.760.346.4750 f.760.340.0089
Group TheAltumGroup.com
ENGINEERING I PLANNING I SURVEY I ENVIRONMENTAL
RLZONE OS ZONE -
EXISTING MOUNTAIN
PLAN VIEW - NTS
--17-
E OF SIGHT
i
_i NORTH
I
PROPERTY LINE RL ZONE I OS ZONE -
AVENIDA FERNANDO LINE OF SIGHT (VIEW TO PEAK)
PROPOSED LINE OF SIGHT _ _----
RESIDENCE�_
EXISTING MOUNTAIN SIDE PROPERTY LINE
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION B - NTS
AUSTIN RESIDENCE VIEWSHED ANALYSIS
DATE: June 13, 2022
✓OB NO.
The 44-600 Village Court, Ste.100
AltumPalm Desert, CA 92260
t.760.346.4750 f.760.340.0089
Group TheAltumGroup.com
ENGINEERING I PLANNING I SURVEY I ENVIRONMENTAL
� REZONE OS ZONE
.tiMai
LINE OF SIGHT
PROPOSED TENNIS �? w
COURT
EXISTING MOUNTAIN
n.
- - i
PROPOSED SPA
NORTH
PLAN VIEW - NTS
I
PROPERTY LINE RL ZONE OS ZONE —
AVENIDA FERNANDO LINE OF SIGHT (VIEW TO PEAK)
LINE OF SIGHT _—_-----------------
EXISTING MOUNTAIN SIDE PROPERTY LINE —
PROPOSED
TENNIS COURT
LINE OF SIGHT SECTION C - NTS
AUSTIN RESIDENCE VIEWSHED ANALYSIS
DATE: June 13, 2022
✓OB NO.
The 44-600 Village Court, Ste.100
AltumPalm Desert, CA 92260
t.760.346.4750 f.760.340.0089
Group TheAltumGroup.com
ENGINEERING I PLANNING I SURVEY I ENVIRONMENTAL
OWNERIDEVELOPER
ENGINEER
('sv s7�Ala— .—E o.)a,z� 9zo -
ARCHITECT���� na omr
U.)n9 5593
BASIS OF BEARINGS
93/5
UTILITY PURVEYORS
SElrER/ N— w R (7.)— z 1
W5. 1xE . ........
EI£Cia : R vR CT ('/EO)398 5811
LEL£vHONE: E � � Ev (888)659 90J9
GELE: SPECmuu (a55)9BE 6919
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:
nv. ors MEurtE Puce g191
Imn°rto�3o sae;c ru:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
E too usa wux Js
APK 658-1700-0014
ZONE. 0'
GRAPHIC SCALE
/ HIIIOII��
/
I I II III�lf 11
�. IIIII III�I�IIIII�IIIIIIIII,II ��
�IjIIII��II�INI Il/
IIIIIIIIIIIQI\\I lut�lllllllllllll / i�"�
111,11 II
ZONE- 00
r
la /)MIIIII�
]
Inv[
800Nn3c001ES1x Ai -E 5 ovFlouL 1IOVOS D —19DE I / llllll lll�lll, /l
SITE ADDRESS: _ Illllllyyllllllllllli lllllllljjl ll
n 000 AVI- FEnx+rtoo
01 WA MOUNTAINOUS AREA _ Alilllllll ll IIII\IIIII II it
u a 9zz51 —
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER. IEo s3s.a9s \,I G�4/lam/�4f
THOMAS BROS REFERENCE: I -
(uirsi mmOx) 'If II I
MAP REFERENCES Ililllillilnllilul lillu� ll
s 9J/5 IIIII\\IIIII\1��\Nl�llll fl/! / 1//////III/IIIIIIIIII
TOPOGRAPHY
Sum2v N MAY zozo vxEVAAEo ev 1\\\0
IM{�Itlllllllllll l�l�Ar—
d i II
u , ��JI11�\
I;11+i11�`r���llollllllllll,l;
:ill\yllluhllilV �Will�lll ll -
(711
�nl 9 9—_�TIIv,Jldu'llid4dl�4eV°i , MI
LINEICURVE TABLE
+
/
li4i�iil ling ii l/ ry
6
/
� I
�\�\\\\\�/1\IIIIIIIIIIII III�II��Illll �llllllllll IIII
1,\\ \ 11 I Il it �I �I� l�✓� �
Exs
�
ErOxnrvrvets
= �� . I
1 I
„
apt 6� o �� 770�00�1
ZO�l,
SLere
� 15wnc e/L
,I I<"
LINE/CURVE TABLE
unE/cum< / Irncm erWmcryaiA anus iva:wr
;HI
��xoa Va39
• sro el v � ' A
Dallana alg. �n
l,
AGNEo Os
_ I
^I
1 l(�
� I
I I I
EiErrtory eas -
f
�Exlm
/
q /
c zogE LNE
R-3 %
�I
I .
0
I
RESIDENTIAL AREA
I IN
o
Z
a
Q
z�
/'�Ex r�9u aex�e z -II
LU
rx rz M " o' J ❑ a
I-- I
MIME. II LI LS ICI IJ Ie%
SITE
TOE OF SLOPE (BREAK FROM 20%+�:
1-0
os Ise) ws _ _ orowemeofm �aoa e. "�emoas € € u
OND iI oEV—P.ILE E ZONE 1. OS IK w
3
IN
VICINITY MAP
�SSI nmo TME °^" or a aixra artn9oE .— cn —Ni. SHEET No.
WE —ENGINEERING . TOE of SLOPE EXHIBITFOR 1
77-600 AVENI3FERNANDO
RS 9/
3RES
05
THE AUSTIN RESIDENCE of sins
Woi E. sEnEreEv�mx.-n.xN xcma an x 20200E 20_CZ
The Toe of Slope Map Exhibit
i3 Altum Austin Residence 6
Group
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Chapter 3 Environmental Evaluation
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
n
❑ Biological Resources ❑
❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑
❑
Land Use/Planning
❑
❑
Population/Housing
❑
❑
Transportation/Traffic
❑
❑
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION:
Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
Cultural Resources
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Mineral Resources
Public Services
Tribal Cultural Resources
❑ Air Quality
❑ Geology/Soils
❑ Hydrology/Water Quality
❑ Noise
❑ Recreation
❑ Utilities and Service Systems
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to
by the 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 describe 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.
2/2/2023
Signature Date
Austin Residence IS/MND 12 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.1 Aesthetics
3.1.1 Sources
• City of La Quinta, City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan, Adopted February 19, 2013.
• City of La Quinta, Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2010111094) for the City of La Quinta
General Plan, July 2012.
https://www.laguintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/15858/635338594527270000
• California Department of Transportation, California State Scenic Highway System Map, 2019.
• Coachella Valley Conservation Commission, Joint Project Review, January 2022
• Google Earth, 2022.
3.1.2 Environmental Setting
Scenic views from the Project site consists of the San Bernardino (north, northeast, and northwest), Santa Rosa
(southwest), and San Jacinto (west) Mountain Ranges. The San Bernardino, Santa Rosa, and San Jacinto
Mountains Ranges rise over the valley floor at elevations consisting of 8,716 feet (2,657 meters), 8,011 feet
(2,442 meters), and 11,489 feet (3,502 meters), respectively.
3.1.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
AESTHETICS —Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
❑
❑
®
❑
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
❑
❑
❑
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) In non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of
the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage
❑
❑
®
❑
point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would
the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
❑
®
❑
❑
in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site does not contain a scenic vista. However, a scenic vista
consisting of scenic views of the San Jacinto Mountains is located immediately north and east of the
Project site and 0.5-mile of the west of the Project site. As shown in Exhibit 4, 5, and 6 Viewshed Study A,
Viewshed Study 8, and Viewshed Study C respectively, the vertical height of the proposed improvements
to the existing home in the residential zone would not be taller than the existing home. Therefore, these
improvements would not obscure views of the hillside immediately east of the Project site. In addition,
Austin Residence IS/MND 13 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
the proposed tennis court (which would include three 18-foot tall lights), spa, seating areas, lawns, and
landscaping in the open space zone would not consist of vertical height sufficient to impact viewshed, and
thus would have no impact to the views of the immediate hillside to the east. In conclusion, the proposed
Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas and impacts would be less than
significant.
b. No Impact. According to the California Scenic Highway Program, the nearest scenic highway is SR-74,
which is located approximately 5.3 miles west of the Project site, and is classified as an Officially -
Designated Scenic Highway. Due to the distance and mountains between the Project site and SR-74, the
Project site is not visible to vehicles driving along SR-74. In addition, there are no historic buildings nor
any unique geologic or topographic features such as rock outcrops, bodies of water, ridges or canyons
that would be impacted from implementation of the Project. Therefore, due to topography and avoidance
of any unique geologic or topographic features, the proposed Project would not substantially damage
scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway. No impact would occur.
C. Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located in an urbanized area. Under existing conditions,
the entire Project site consists of a residential home with areas of vacant, undeveloped land. The Project
site is bordered by Avenida Fernando, followed by the La Quinta Resort; mountain slopes are located
immediately to the north and east; and an existing residence to the west. Implementation of the Project
would result in home improvements including a new tennis court, spa, seating areas, lawns, and
landscaping. The Project would be required to comply with the applicable development standards and
design guidelines in the City of La Quinta Zoning Code, which regulates the visual quality of new
development and ensures that new development does not detract from any scenic attributes/qualities in
the surrounding area. Specifically, the Project would be required to comply with Zoning Code Section
9.140.040, Hillside Conservation Regulations, which applies to all land within the City designated in the
General Plan as "Open Space." According to Exhibit 6, Toe of Slope Map, the Project would not disturb
slopes 10% and over, and all improvements would occur on the space above the toe of the slope;
therefore, the Project would be consistent with the Hillside Conservation regulations. Because the Project
is located in an urbanized area and because the Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality, a less -than -significant impact would occur from
implementation of the Project.
d. Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Under existing conditions, the Project site
contains no sources of artificial lighting. The Project would introduce new sources of lighting, including
tennis court lighting (see Appendix D, Tennis Court Photometric Austin Residence). The proposed Project
would somewhat increase lighting and glare. However, all light sources will be designed with internal
baffles to direct the lighting towards the ground and the developed areas and have a zero -side angle cut
off to the horizon. Therefore, lighting will not result in impacts that extends beyond the development
footprint boundary. Additionally, due to the Project's adjacency to the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto
Mountains Conservation Area (SRSJM), the Project will be required to comply with the Land Use
Adjacency Guidelines of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP) and
the recommendations of the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC), which require that all
ambient lighting of landscape features shall be oriented facing away from the mountainside and into the
property so that the surrounding conservation area is not impacted by unnatural light sources as
described in Mitigation Measure (MM) AES-1 below.
Austin Residence IS/MND 14 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Subject to City review and approval, all Project lighting would be required to conform to regulations,
guidelines, and standards established under the City's Municipal Code Section 9.100.150, Outdoor
Lighting, which ensures adequate lighting for public safety while also minimizing light pollution and glare
and public nuisances. Mandatory compliance with the City's Zoning Code would ensure that the Project
would not introduce any permanent design features that would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area. With the implementation of MM AES-1, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
3.1.4 Mitigation
AES-1
During Project construction and long-term operation, the Project shall eliminate all nonessential
lighting throughout the Project area and avoid or limit the use of artificial light during the hours of
dawn and dusk when many wildlife species are most active. Ensure that all lighting for Project is fully
shielded, cast downward, reduced in intensity to the greatest extent, and does not result in lighting
trespass including glare onto other properties —including any areas of the adjacent Santa Rosa and San
Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area —or upward into the night sky (see the International Dark -Sky
Association standards at http://darksky.org/). Use LED lighting with a correlated color temperature of
3,000 Kelvins or less, properly dispose of hazardous waste, and recycle lighting that contains toxic
compounds with a aualified recvcler.
3.1.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
With implementation of MM AES-1, impacts on aesthetics would be less than significant.
3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
3.2.1 Sources
• Riverside Mop My County, 2022.
https://gisl.countyofriverside.us/Htm15Viewer/?viewer=MMC Public.
3.2.2 Environmental Setting
The Project site is presently vacant and the ground surface is covered with scattered desert brush, weeds, and
minor debris. The Project site has an existing ground surface elevation range from about 35 to 42 feet above
mean sea level (amsl). The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) designates the Project site as
Urban and Built -Up Land and Other Land.
3.2.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and
Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in
Austin Residence IS/MND 15 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including
timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including
the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon
measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted bythe California Air Resources Board. 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 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 Contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning
of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
❑
❑
❑
Resources Code section 4526) or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
❑
❑
❑
forest land to non -forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
❑
❑
❑
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non -forest use?
a-e. No Impact. According to mapping information available from the California Department of Conservation's
(CDC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), the Project site is classified as Urban and
Built -Up Land and Other Land. Accordingly, the Project site does not contain any lands mapped by the
FMMP as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland); therefore,
the Project would not convert such Farmland to non-agricultural use. Furthermore, the Project site is not
located within a Williamson Act contract. Lastly, the Project site is zoned for Open Space under existing
conditions; therefore, the Project would not conflict with zoning for agricultural use or result in the loss
of forest land or convert forest land or timberland to non -forest land. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
3.2.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.2.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
Austin Residence IS/MND 16 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.3 Air Quality
3.3.1 Sources
• South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan, March 2017.
www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2016-air-quality-
management-plan/final-2016-aqmp/final2016agmp.pdf?sfvrsn=15
3.3.2 Environmental Setting
The Project site is within the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD is one of the 35 air quality regulatory agencies in the
State of California and all development within the SSAB is subject to SCAQMD's 2016 Air Quality Management
Plan (2016 AQMP) and the 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (2003 CV PM10 SIP). The
SSAB exceeds state and federal standards for fugitive dust (PM10) and ozone (03), and is in
attainment/unclassified for PM2.5. Ambient air quality in the SSAB, including the Project site, does not exceed
state and federal standards for carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxides, sulfur dioxide, lead, sulfates, hydrogen
sulfide, or Vinyl Chloride.
3.3.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
AIR QUALITY — Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
❑
❑
❑
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non -attainment under an
❑
❑
®
❑
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
❑
❑
®
❑
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number
❑
❑
❑
of people?
a. No Impact. The SCAQMD has established the AQMP to achieve State and Federal air quality standards.
On June 30, 2016, the SCAQMD released its Draft 2016 AQMP. The Plan was approved by the California
Environmental Protection Agency (CA EPA) on June 15, 2017. Therefore, the applicable air quality plan for
the Project is the SCAQMD 2016 AQMP. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that "New or amended
General Plan Elements (including land use zoning and density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant
projects must be analyzed for consistency with the AQMP." Strict consistency with all aspects of the plan
Austin Residence IS/MND 17 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
is usually not required. A project should be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one
or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The pollutant reducing mechanisms in the AQMP
are based, in part, on urban growth projections estimated by the SCAG. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook
identifies two key indicators of consistency:
Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality
violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay timely attainment of air quality standards
or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP.
2. Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP in 2016 or increments based on the
year of project buildout and phase.
Below, Criterion 1 and Criterion 2 are discussed.
Criterion 1- Increase in the Freauencv or Severitv of Violations?
The proposed Project consists of a tennis court and spa grotto which do not have operation air quality
impacts. The anticipated period of construction requiring fossil -fuel powered equipment would be
approximately 2-4 weeks. Equipment would include the use of a backhoe, bobcat, or similar equipment,
which generate nominal carbon emissions that are well below the SCAQMD screening threshold of 3,000
MTCO2e per year. In addition, long-term operational impacts would not result in impacts based on the
SCAQMD local and regional thresholds of significance. Therefore, the Project will not increase the
frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations.
Based on the information provided above, the proposed Project would be consistent with the first
criterion.
Criterion 2 - Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP?
Consistency with the AQMP assumptions is determined by performing an analysis of the proposed Project
with the assumptions in the AQMP. The emphasis of this criterion is to ensure that the analyses conducted
for the proposed Project are based on the same forecasts as the AQMP. The AQMP is developed through
use of the planning forecasts provided in the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities
Strategy (RTP/SCS) and Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). The RTP/SCS is a major
planning document for the regional transportation and land use network within Southern California. The
RTP/SCS is a long-range plan that is required by federal and state requirements placed on SCAG and is
updated every four years. The FTIP provides long-range planning for future transportation improvement
projects that are constructed with state and/or federal funds within Southern California. Local
governments are required to use these plans as the basis of their plans for the purpose of consistency
with applicable regional plans under CEQA. For this Project, the City of La Quinta General Plan's Land Use
Plan defines the long range land use assumptions that are represented in AQMP.
The Project has a current land use and zoning classification of Open Space with a Hillside Conservation
Overlay according to the City of La Quinta General Plan and Official Zoning Map. The proposed Project is
to develop the site with a tennis court and spa grotto, which may be permitted in the Open Space Zone
and Hillside Conservation Overlay. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in an inconsistency
with the land use designation in the City's General Plan. Therefore, the proposed Project is not anticipated
to exceed the AQMP assumptions for the Project site and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the
second criterion.
Austin Residence IS/MND 18 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Based on the above, the proposed Project would not result in an inconsistency with the SCAQMD AQMP.
Therefore, a less -than -significant impact would occur in relation to implementation of the AQMP.
b-c. Less than Significant Impact. The Project consists of a tennis court and spa grotto. The anticipated period
of construction requiring fossil -fuel powered equipment would be approximately 2-4 weeks. Equipment
would include the use of a backhoe, bobcat, or similar equipment, which generate nominal carbon
emissions that are well below the SCAQMD screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. The Project
would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project
region is non -attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard, and the
Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Impacts would be
less than significant.
C. No Impact. Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the application
of materials such as asphalt pavement. The objectionable odors that may be produced during the
construction process are of short-term in nature and the odor emissions are expected cease upon the
drying or hardening of the odor producing materials. Diesel exhaust and VOCs would be emitted during
construction of the Project, which are objectionable to some; however, emissions would disperse rapidly
from the Project site and therefore should not reach an objectionable level at the nearest sensitive
receptors. Due to the short-term nature and limited amounts of odor producing materials being utilized,
no significant impact related to odors would occur during construction of the proposed Project.
The SCAQMD recommends that odor impacts be addressed in a qualitative manner. Such an analysis shall
determine whether the Project would result in excessive nuisance odors, as defined under the California
Code of Regulations and Section 41700 of the California Health and Safety Code, and thus would constitute
a public nuisance related to air quality.
There would be no odors being emitted during the on -going operations of the proposed Project due to the
nature of the Project as a tennis court and spa grotto. Furthermore, the Applicant would be required to
comply with SCAQMD's Rule 402, which would ensure no significant odor impacts.
3.3.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.3.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.4 Biological Resources
3.4.1 Sources
• Coachella Valley Conservation Commission, Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
Plan, August 2016
• Coachella Valley Conservation Commission, Joint Project Review, January 2022
• ELMT Consulting, Biological Resources Report for the Austin Residence Project Located in the City of La
Quinta, Riverside County, California, January 12, 2022 (Appendix A)
Austin Residence IS/MND 19 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.4.2 Environmental Setting
The City offers unique natural habitats to a range of plants and wildlife due to its climate and natural
topography. The City recognizes the value of the wildlands and wildlife and has carefully planned to protect,
preserve, and enhance the regions valuable biological resources. The City is located within the Coachella Valley
Multiple Species Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP). This is a regional plan that is implemented throughout the
Coachella Valley in an effort comply with federal and State endangered species laws.
A literature review and records search for the site was conducted by ELMT Consulting. The literature search
identified 16 special -status plant species, 23 special -status wildlife species, and one special -status plant
community as having potential to occur within the La Quinta City quadrangle.
ELMT also conducted a field survey of the site. The area where the proposed Project activities will occur ranges
in elevation from 50 to 55 feet above mean sea level (amsl). The hillside, within the parcel boundaries, outside
of the proposed limits of disturbance raises sharply from the disturbed area and increases in elevation to
approximately 180 feet amsl.
No special -status plants were observed on the Project site during the field investigation. No fish, amphibians,
or hydrogeomorphic features that would provide suitable habitat for fish or amphibians would be observed on
or within the vicinity of the Project site. The Project site provides suitable foraging and cover habitat for
reptilian species adapted to routine human disturbance and desert environments. The only reptilian species
observed during the field investigation were Great Basin whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris tigris) and western side -
blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans). The Project site provides suitable foraging and nesting habitat for
avian species adapted to routine human disturbance and desert environments. Bird species detected during
the field investigation include mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), common raven (Corvus corax), great -tailed
grackle (Quiscalus mexicanus), white -crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), northern mockingbird (Mimus
polyglottos), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), and rock pigeon (Columba liva), and verdin (Auriparus
flaviceps). The Project site provides suitable foraging and denning habitat for mammalian species adapted to
routine human disturbance and desert environments. However, most mammal species are nocturnal and are
difficult to observe during a diurnal field visit. Mammals detected and/or sign observed during the field
investigation include desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), and coyote (Canis latrans). No active nests or
birds displaying nesting behavior were observed during the field survey, which was conducted outside of the
breeding season. Although subjected to routine disturbance, the ornamental vegetation found on -site has the
potential to provide suitable nesting habitat for year-round and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating
songbirds that could occur in the area that area adapted to urban environments. No raptors are expected to
nest on -site due to lack of suitable nesting opportunities. Lastly, the Project site is not located within a federally
designated Critical Habitat.
3.4.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significan
No
Impact
Incorporated
t Impact
Impact
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
Austin Residence IS/MND 20 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significan
No
Impact
Incorporated
t Impact
Impact
status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
❑
❑
❑
policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. 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, 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 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, such as a tree
❑
❑
❑
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
❑
®
❑
❑
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. According the City's General Plan, the Project site is
located within the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), which aims
to conserve over 240,000 acres of open space and protect 27 plant and animal species. The Coachella
Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) is a joint powers authority tasked with overseeing the
implementation of the CVMSHCP. The Project abuts the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains
Conservation Area (SRSJM), and a small portion of the Project will extend into the SRSJM boundary (see
Figure 2 of Coachella Valley Conservation Commission Joint Project Review). Furthermore, approximately
0.75 acres of the Project will take place within the SRSJM, rounded to the nearest quarter -acre. The SRSJM
provides Essential Habitat for Peninsular big horn sheep. Peninsular bighorn sheep are a fully protected
species under the California Endangered Species Act. Due to the Project's location within the SRSJM and
its potential to impact a Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat, the CVCC recommends Mitigation Measure
1310-1, which is outlined below, and requires the installation of fencing either at project buildout or
through granting to CVCC an easement for the future construction of such a fence to separate the Project
from the SRSJM. With implementation of this mitigation measure, impacts on the SRSJM and Peninsular
bighorn sheep will be less than significant.
Austin Residence IS/MND 21 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Special -Status Vegetation Communities & Critical Habitat Analysis
According to the field survey conducted by ELMT Consulting, the Project site supports two land cover
types that would be classified as disturbed and developed. The disturbed areas on the Project site occur
throughout the proposed limits of disturbed in association with areas that have been graded and
maintained as part of existing residential activities. These areas are unvegetated or vegetated with a
limited variety of hardy native and non-native plant species such as Mediterranean grass, barbwire
Russian thistle, and puncture vine. The developed portions of the Project site coincide with the existing
residential development and landscaping. Based on observations made during the field survey, the Project
would not impact any special -status vegetation community.
According to literature review, one special -status plant community was identified as having potential to
occur within the La Quinta quadrangle: Desert Fan Palm Oasis Woodland. However, based on the results
of the field survey above, no special -status plant community was observed on -site; therefore, no special -
status plant community would be impacted by Project implementation.
The Project site is also not located within a federally designated Critical Habitat. The nearest designated
Critical Habitat to the site is located approximately 0.75-mile to the southwest for Peninsular bighorn
sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni). Therefore, the Project would not cause loss or adverse modification of a
Critical Habitat and impacts would be less than significant.
Special -Status Plant Species Analysis
According to literature review, 16 special -status plant species were identified as having potential to occur
within the La Quinta quadrangle. Species determined to have a potential to occur within the general
vicinity of the site are presented in Attachment C of Appendix A. No special -status plants were observed
on the Project site during the field survey. Based on habitat requirements for specific species, the
availability and quality of on -site habitats, and the isolation of the site and adjacent open space from
nearby habitats, it was determined that the Project site does not have potential to support any of the
special -status plant species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed to be absent.
In addition, the Project site is located outside of the known elevation ranges for the majority of the
special -status plant species known to occur in the area. Therefore, Project impacts to special -status plant
species would be less than significant.
Special -Status Wildlife Species Analysis
According to literature review, 23 special -status wildlife species were identified as having potential to
occur within the La Quinta quadrangle. Species determined to have a potential to occur within the general
vicinity of the site are presented in Attachment C of Appendix A. No special -status wildlife species were
observed on -site during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the
availability and quality of on -site habitats, it was determined that the Project site has a moderate potential
to support prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus) and black -tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melaneura). It was
further determined that all other special -status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the site
do not have potential to occur and are presumed to be absent.
None of the aforementioned special -status wildlife species are state or federally listed as threatened or
endangered. In order to ensure impacts to these avian species do not occur from implementation of the
Project, a pre -construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance
as described in Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO-2, below. With implementation of MM BIO-2, impacts to
special -status avian species would be less than significant.
Austin Residence IS/MND 22 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
No fish, amphibians, or hydrogeomorphic features that would provide suitable habitat for fish or
amphibians would be observed on or within the vicinity of the Project site. The Project site provides
suitable foraging and cover habitat for reptilian species adapted to routine human disturbance and desert
environments. The only reptilian species observed during the field investigation were Great Basin whiptail
(Aspidoscelis tigris tigris) and western side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans). The Project site
provides suitable foraging and nesting habitat for avian species adapted to routine human disturbance
and desert environments. Bird species detected during the field investigation include mourning dove
(Zenaida macroura), common raven (Corvus corax), white -crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys),
northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), rock pigeon (Columba
liva), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus). The Project site
provides suitable foraging and denning habitat for mammalian species adapted to routine human
disturbance and desert environments. However, most mammal species are nocturnal and are difficult to
observe during a diurnal field visit. Mammals detected and/or sign observed during the field investigation
include desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), which is not a special -status species. In conclusion,
impacts to reptiles and mammals would be less than significant.
No active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were observed during the field survey, which was
conducted outside of the breeding season. Although subjected to routine disturbance, the ornamental
vegetation found on -site and the vegetation on the rocky slopes have the potential to provide suitable
nesting habitat for year-round and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating songbirds that could
occur in the area that area adapted to urban environments. However, with implementation of MM 1310-
2, impacts to migrating songbirds would be less than significant. No raptors are expected to nest on -site
due to lack of suitable nesting opportunities.
Therefore, with implementation of MM 1310-1 and 1310-2, impacts will be less than significant.
b/c. No Impact. No jurisdictional drainage and/or wetland features were observed on the Project site during
the field survey. Furthermore, no blueline streams have been recorded on the Project site and there is no
evidence that the Project contained any streams, riparian habitat, marshes, protected wetlands, vernal
pools or sensitive natural communities that would be protected by the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW) or by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Therefore, no impact would occur.
d. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The northern boundary of the Project site is located
within the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area. The Santa Rosa and San Jacinto
Mountains Conservation Area provides essential habitat for Peninsular bighorn sheep. Even though the
northern portion of the Project site is located within the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains
Conservation Area, the site is located at the edge of the Conservation Area and is bordered by existing
development to the south and west, which reduces, if not eliminates potential wildlife movement
opportunities across the Project site. As such, implementation of the proposed Project is not expected to
impact wildlife movement opportunities. Therefore, impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are not
expected to occur.
However, nesting birds have the potential to occur given the ornamental vegetation found on site and
the vegetation on the rocky slopes. The Project's future construction could adversely affect nesting birds
if construction was to occur while they are present or adjacent to the Project site, through direct mortality
or abandonment of nest. If this was to occur it would be a violation of the MBTA and CFGC 3503, and a
potentially significant impact. However, implementation of MM 1310-2 would require a pre -construction
Austin Residence IS/MND 23 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
nesting bird survey to mitigate any potential impacts to protect migratory nesting birds. The pre -
construction survey shall be conducted by a biologist prior to any ground disturbing activities and/or
removal of any vegetation. In the event that a raptor nest is observed personnel will be notified and no
ground disturbing activities will occur until the avian biologist has confirmed the breeding/nesting is
completed and the young have fledged the nest. Therefore, through implementation of MM 13I0-2,
impacts would be reduced to less than significant.
e. No Impact. The City has not adopted any ordinances regarding tree preservation. As observed during
the field survey, the Project site mainly consists of small and medium size shrubs. Therefore, the
Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as
a tree preservation policy or ordinance and no impact would occur.
f. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in section 3.4.3a, the Project site is
located within the Coachella Valley Multiply Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), which aims
to conserve over 240,000 acres of open space and protect 27 plant and animal species. Due to the
Project's location within the SRSJM and its potential to impact a Peninsular bighorn sheep habitat, the
CVCC recommends Mitigation Measure 1310-1, which is outlined below, and requires the installation of
fencing either at project buildout or through granting to CVCC an easement for the future construction
of such a fence to separate the Project from the SRSJM. The Project will comply with all provisions of
the CVMSHCP. Additionally, the Project would be subject to payment of the Development Mitigation
fee per Chapter 3.34, Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community
Conservation Plan Mitigation Fee, as described as MM 1310-3. The fee would mitigate potential impacts
to covered species within the CVMSHCP. With implementation of MM BIO-1 and MM-1310 2, the Project
would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan, and impacts
would be less than significant.
3.4.4 Mitigation
13I0-1 The Project developer shall ensure the installation of Peninsular bighorn sheep (PBS) fence, either at
project buildout or through granting to Coachella Valley Conservation Commission an easement for
the future construction of such a fence, and further, that if an easement is to be granted, it shall be
recorded prior to the issuance of any grading permits. Upon recordation of a fence easement and
establishment of a financial instrument (or plans for fence construction at the time of project buildout),
as well as revision of the lighting plan (outlined in Mitigation Measure AES-1), this Project may be
considered fully consistent with the CVMSHCP. If, during subsequent review of the Project, it is
determined that any of the above conditions have not been met, or that the Project impacts differ
significantly from those reviewed in the Joint Project Review (including a fence alignment above the
toe of slope), this consistency determination shall be rendered null and void
1310-2
Nesting bird surveys shall be performed by a qualified avian biologist no more than 3 days prior to
vegetation removal or ground -disturbing activities. Pre -construction surveys shall focus on both direct
and indirect evidence of nesting, including nest locations and nesting behavior. The qualified avian
biologist will make every effort to avoid potential nest predation as a result of survey and monitoring
efforts. If active nests are found during the pre -construction nesting bird surveys, a qualified biologist
shall establish an appropriate nest buffer to be marked on the ground. Nest buffers are species specific
and shall be at least 300 feet for passerines and 500 feet for raptors. A smaller or larger buffer may be
Austin Residence IS/MND 24 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
determined by the qualified biologist familiar with the nesting phenology of the nesting species and
based on nest and buffer monitoring results. Established buffers shall remain on site until a qualified
biologist determines the young have fledged or the nest is no longer active. Active nests and adequacy
of the established buffer distance shall be monitored daily by the qualified biologist until the qualified
biologist has determined the young have fledged or the Project has been completed. The qualified
biologist has the authority to stop work if nesting pairs exhibit signs of disturbance.
11310-3 The Applicant shall pay the CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee prior to building permit
issuance.
3.4.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
With implementation of MM BIO-1, BIO-2 and BIO-3, impacts on biological resources would be less than
significant.
3.5 Cultural Resources
3.5.1 Sources
• CRM TECH, Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Assessor's Parcel Numbers 658-170-003
and -010, March 28, 2022. (Appendix B)
3.5.2 Environmental Setting
The Project area lies on the northwestern edge of the La Quinta City limits but close to the historical center of
development in the community, being directly across Avenida Fernando from the La Quinta Resort. More
specifically, it is situated at the southern base of a steep finger ridge of the Indio Mountain, a part of the Santa
Rosa -San Jacinto mountain range. Other than the La Quinta Resort, the surrounding land use is primarily
residential in character.
Elevations in the Project area range around 50-60 feet above mean sea level, and the terrain is relatively level
with a gradual incline towards the north. The ground surface has been extensively disturbed by past
construction and landscaping activities associated with the adjacent property as well as construction and
improvements that were previously undertaken within the Project boundaries. Native vegetation on the
property has been largely cleared and replaced with introduced landscaping plants, such as a few palms and
small tamarisks along the northern and western Project boundaries. Other than these, the remaining
vegetation is limited to scattered growth of small desert shrubs and grasses such as brittlebush and
tumbleweed, along with several palo verde trees.
3.5.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would the project:
Austin Residence IS/MND 25 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in §
❑
®
❑
❑
15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
❑
®
❑
❑
to § 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
❑
®
❑
❑
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
a/b. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. A literature review and records search were
conducted by the Eastern Information Center (EIC) on January 20, 2022. No cultural resources were
previously recorded within the Project boundaries. During a 2006 update to the citywide historical
resources survey, the existing property at the Project site (APN 658-170-011) was noted as being historical
in age but no longer retaining sufficient original character to relate to its period of construction. Due to
extensive alterations in the modern era and the resulting loss of historic integrity, it was not considered
a potential historical resource.
Within the half -mile scope of the records search, EIC records identify at least 20 area -specific studies on
various tracts of land and linear features, including the adjacent property to the north and east. These
studies resulted in the recordation of 18 historical/archaeological sites and three isolates (i.e., localities
with fewer than three artifacts) within the half -mile radius. Four of the sites and all three of the isolates
were prehistoric—i.e., Native American —in origin. The sites consisted of bedrock milling features such as
mortars and grinding slicks, while each of the isolates was a single brownware ceramic sherd. These
prehistoric cultural resources were recorded primarily to the north of the Project location, along the base
of the foothills.
The other 14 sites dated to the historic period consisted of buildings, such as the original La Quinta Resort
from the 1926-1927 era, along with some refuse deposits. As mentioned above, the resort is located to
the south of Avenida Fernando, across from the Project location. None of the other sites and isolates
previously recorded within the scope of the records search in the immediate vicinity of the Project area
demonstrate any potential to be impacted by the proposed Project, either directly or indirectly. In
addition, based on its depiction in the historical maps and aerial photographs, the Project area has low
sensitivity for cultural resources from the historic period.
The field survey conducted by CRM TECH on February 18, 2022 produced completely negative results for
potential "historical resources," and no buildings, structures, objects, sites, features, or artifacts of
prehistoric or historical origin were encountered within the Project site. Although the residence at the
property is known to date to the late historic period, the related landscaping, driveways, light fixtures,
and structures are all clearly modern in age. As noted above, most of the Project site has been extensively
disturbed in the past, especially the recent past. As such, the property appears to be relatively low in
sensitivity for subsurface archaeological deposits of either prehistoric or early historic origin.
In addition, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) did not identify any sites of traditional
cultural value in the Project vicinity, and no notable cultural features are known to have been present in
Austin Residence IS/MND 26 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
the Project area throughout the historic period. Based on these findings, and in light of the criteria listed
above, the present study concludes that no "historical resources" exist within the Project site.
Notwithstanding, during earth disturbing activities of the Project, there is a remote chance that
subsurface cultural resources could be discovered. Through implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-
1, if buried cultural materials are discovered during the earth -moving operations, all work within 50 feet
of the discovery will be halted or diverted until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and
significance of the finds and if necessary develop a treatment plan in consultation with the City La Quinta.
Therefore, with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, impacts relating to significant historical
and archaeological resources would be reduced to less -than -significant levels.
c. Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project site is developed with a residential
structure and does not contain any cemeteries or human remains under existing conditions. However,
there is always the possibility that human remains could be uncovered during ground disturbing activities.
In the unexpected event that human remains are found during ground disturbing activities, those remains
would require proper treatment in accordance with all applicable laws. Through the implementation of
Mitigation Measure CUL-2, all construction work taking place within the vicinity of the discovered remains
must cease and the necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the immediate area must be taken. The State
of California Health and Safety Code 7050.5 and the California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98
states that the County Coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovered human remains. If the
remains discovered are determined by the coroner to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall
contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC would, in turn,
contact the Most Likely Descendant (MLD) who would determine further action to be taken. The MLD
would have 48 hours to access the site and make a recommendation regarding disposition of the remains.
Therefore, with incorporation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2, impacts would be less than significant.
3.5.4 Mitigation
CUL-1 A qualified archaeologist monitor shall be present during any ground disturbing activities during
the project construction phase. In the case that archaeological materials are encountered during
ground disturbing activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall cease and any deposits
shall be treated according to federal, State, and local guidelines. No further grading is permitted
in the area of the discovery until the City approves the appropriate measure to protect the
discovered resources.
CUL-2 In the event that human remains are uncovered during ground disturbing activities on the project
site, no further disturbance shall occur and all work shall cease until the County Coroner has made
a determination of the origin and disposition of the remains. Ground disturbing activities and
excavations shall not resume until the County Coroner has been contacted and determined that
no investigation to the cause of death is required. If the County Coroner determines that the
remains are of Native American decent, the Coroner must notify Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC), which will then determine the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall
complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend means of
treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave
goods as provided in Public Resource Code Section 5097.98.
Austin Residence IS/MND 27 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.5.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
With the incorporation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2, impacts to cultural resources would be
reduced to less than significant.
3.6 Energy
3.6.1 Sources
• California Energy Commission, 2019 Building Energy Efficient Standards for Residential and
Nonresidential Buildings, December 2018
https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-06/CEC-400-2018-020-CMF O.pdf
3.6.2 Environmental Setting
Electricity
Southern California Edison (SCE) provides electricity to the City of La Quinta, including the Project site. SCE
utilizes a combination of coal, natural gas, wind, hydroelectric, and geothermal power sources, most of which
are located outside the Valley.
Natural Gas
Natural gas for the Project site is provided by the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). Natural gas
supplies are transported from Texas to the Coachella Valley through three east -west trending transmission
lines, which cross the Valley near and parallel to Interstate-10 and continue west to Los Angeles. The pipelines
include one 30-inch line and two 24-inch lines, with pressures of 2,000 pounds per square inch (psi).
3.6.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Energy — Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
❑
❑
®
❑
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
❑
❑
❑
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
a. Less than Significant Impact.
Energy Use During Construction
The Project's construction process would consume electricity and fuel. Project -related construction
activities would represent a "single -event" demand and would not require on -going or permanent
commitment of energy resources. The amount of energy and fuel use anticipated by the Project's
construction activities are typical for the type of scale of construction proposed by the Project and there
are no aspects of the Project's proposed construction process that are unusual or energy -intensive.
Austin Residence IS/MND 28 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Furthermore, construction equipment would be required to conform to the applicable CARB emissions
standards, acting to promote equipment fuel efficiencies. Based on the foregoing, the Project's
construction energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise
unnecessary. Impacts during Project construction would be less than significant.
Energy Use During Operation
Building operations associated with the proposed spa would result in the consumption of electricity. The
Project provides a private tennis court and spa, which are not inherently energy intensive. The facility
would require power for lighting of the tennis court and landscaping, and power for the spa. Total energy
demands for the Project would not be significant. Furthermore, the Project would be required to comply
with Title 24 standards, which would ensure that the Project's energy demand would not be considered
inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary. Impacts during Project operation would be less than
significant.
b. No Impact. The Project's proposed tennis court and spa would be required to comply with the City's
building codes, Zoning Ordinance, and other standards, including the County's Climate Action Plan
provisions. Therefore, the Project would have no impact on plans for energy efficiency.
3.6.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.6.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.7 Geology and Soils
3.7.1 Sources
Riverside Map My County, 2022.
https.Ilgisl.countyofriverside.uslHtml5Viewerl?viewer=MMC Public
City of La Quinta General Plan, February 19, 2013.
• Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2010111094) for the City of La Quinta General Plan, July
2012.
https://www.laquin taca. qov/home/showpublisheddocument/15858/635338594527270000
3.7.2 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located in the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Trough physiographic province and is a
geologic, structural depression resulting from large scale regional faulting. The trough is bounded by the San
Andreas fault and Chocolate Mountains on the northeast and the Peninsular Range and faults of the San Jacinto
Fault Zone on the southwest. The Salton Trough represents the northward extension of the Gulf of California,
containing both marine and non -marine sediments since the Miocene Epoch. Tectonic activity that formed the
trough continues at a high rate as evidenced by deformed young sedimentary deposits and high levels of
seismicity.
Austin Residence IS/MND 29 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The surrounding regional geology includes the Peninsular Ranges (Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains) to
the south and west, the Salton Sea Basin to the southeast, and the Transverse Ranges (Little San Bernardino
and Orocopia Mountains) to the north and east. Hundreds of feet to several thousand feet of Quaternary
fluvial, lacustrine, and Aeolian soil deposits underlie the Coachella Valley. The southeastern part of the
Coachella Valley lies below sea level. In the past, the ancient Lake Cahuilla submerged the area. Calcareous
tufa deposits may be observed along the ancient shoreline as high as an elevation of 45 to 50 feet above mean
sea level (amsl) along the Santa Rosa Mountains from La Quinta southward. Lacustrine (lake bed) deposits
comprise the subsurface soils over much of the eastern Coachella Valley with alluvial outwash along the flanks
of the valley.
The Project site is located in Southern California, which is a seismically active area. The type and magnitude of
seismic hazards affecting the site are dependent on the distance of causative faults, the intensity, and the
magnitude of the seismic event. Existing ground surface elevations range from 35 to 42 feet amsl.
3.7.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
GEOLOGY AND SOILS — Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
❑
❑
❑
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
❑
❑
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including
❑
❑
®
❑
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
❑
❑
❑
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
❑
❑
®
❑
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off -site
❑
❑
®
❑
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
❑
❑
®
❑
substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
❑
❑
❑
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
Austin Residence IS/MND 30 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
❑
®
❑
❑
feature?
a-i. No Impact. There are no known active faults crossing or projecting through the Project site. The Project
site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, or within a fault zone identified by
the County of Riverside GIS data. Therefore, ground rupture due to faulting is considered unlikely at
this site. No impact would occur.
a-ii. Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located in a seismically active area of southern
California and is expected to experience moderate to severe ground shaking during the lifetime of the
Project. This risk is not considered substantially different than that of other similar properties in the
southern California area. As a mandatory condition of Project approval, Project construction would be
done in accordance with the California Building Standards Code (CBSC), also known as California Code
of Regulations (CCR), Title 24 (Part 2), and the City of La Quinta Building Code, which is based on the
CBSC with local amendments. The CBSC and City of La Quinta Building Code (Chapter 8.02) provide
standards that must be met to safeguard life or limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating
and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and
maintenance of all buildings and structures, and have been specifically tailored for California
earthquake conditions. With mandatory compliance with these standards and site -specific design and
construction measures set forth in the CBSC and the City's Building Code, potential impacts related to
seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. As such, implementation of the Project would
not expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including loss, injury, or death, involving
seismic ground shaking. Impacts would be less -than -significant.
a-iii. Less than Significant Impact. According to Riverside Map My County, the majority of the Project site
is located within an area with low liquefaction susceptibility and the top northern portion of the site is
not located within a liquefaction susceptibility zone. In addition, prior to issuance of a grading permit,
a geotechnical report would be required to be submitted for approval. The Project Applicant would be
required to comply with the grading and construction recommendations contained within the
geotechnical report for the Project to further reduce the risk of seismic -related ground failure due to
liquefaction. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people
or structures to substantial hazards associated with seismic -related ground failure and/or liquefaction
hazards. Impacts would be less than significant.
a -iv. Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is generally flat and contains no substantial natural or
man-made slopes under existing conditions. There are natural slopes located immediately north and
east of the Project site. However, according to the slope analysis provided by Essi Engineering
(Appendix C) and Exhibit 6, the Project would not impact the toe of the slope. Accordingly,
development on the subject property would not be exposed to landslide risks and the Project would
not pose a landslide risk to surrounding properties. Impacts would be less than significant.
b. Less than Significant Impact. During construction of the proposed Project, soils would be disrupted
during grading activities due to exposure of uncovered soils, thereby increasing the potential for wind
Austin Residence IS/MND 31 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
or water -related erosion and sedimentation until construction is completed. The Project would be
required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 to minimize water and windborne erosion. Long-term
operation of the Project as a tennis court and spa would not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of
topsoil. Therefore, with adherence to SCAQMD Rule 403, the proposed Project would result in less -
than -significant -impacts related to soil erosion.
C. Less than Significant. The Project site does not contain substantial natural or man-made slopes under
existing conditions. However, there are hillsides immediately north and east of the Project site with a
potential to expose the site to landslide hazards. According to Appendix C and Exhibit 6, the Project
would not impact the toe of the slope. Therefore, no impact would occur related to landslides.
Lateral spreading is primarily associated with liquefaction hazards. As previously mentioned in Section
3.7.3(a)(ii), above, the Project site is located within a low liquefaction susceptibility zone. In addition,
the Project Applicant would be required to submit a geotechnical report prior to issuance of a grading
permit and comply with the grading and construction recommendations contained within that
geotechnical report to further reduce the risk of seismic -related ground failure due to liquefaction. The
Project Applicant also would be required to comply with the site -specific ground preparation and
construction recommendations contained in the geotechnical report for the Project site, which would
attenuate the site's settlement potential. Therefore, impacts associated with liquefaction, lateral
spreading, shrinkage/subsidence, and collapse would be less than significant.
d. Less than Significant Impact. According to the Web Soil Survey, the Project site consists of desert land
comprised of Gilman silt loam. Due to the low clay content in the underlying soil, this near surface soil
can be anticipated to have very low expansion characteristics. The Project site is not located in an area
known for expansive soil (as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994)), and the
potential for the Project to create substantial risks to life or property, relating to expansive soils, is very
low. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
No Impact. The Project would not involve the use of septic tanks or any other alternative wastewater
disposal systems. Therefore, there would be no impacts associated with septic tanks or alternative
wastewater systems.
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. According to the City's General Plan EIR and the
Riverside Map My County, the Project site is located within a High Paleontological Sensitivity due to
Pleistocene sediments and sediments from ancient Lake Cahuilla beds. Therefore, a professional
paleontologist would be retained to prepare and implement paleontological monitoring and mitigation
plan (PRMMP) as described in Mitigation Measures GEO-1 through GEO-4. Therefore, with
implementation of Mitigation Measures GEO-1 through GEO-4, potential impacts to a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature would be reduced to less than significant.
3.7.4 Mitigation
The following mitigation measures are required:
GEO-1 Prior to the start of the proposed project activities, all field personnel will receive a worker's
environmental awareness training on paleontological resources. The training will provide a
description of the laws and ordinances protecting fossil resources, the types of fossil resources
that may be encountered in the project area, the role of the paleontological monitor, outline steps
Austin Residence IS/MND 32 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
to follow in the event that a fossil discovery is made, and provide contact information for the
project paleontologist. The training will be developed by the project paleontologist and can be
delivered concurrent with other training including cultural, biological, safety, etc.
GEO-2 Prior to the commencement of ground -disturbing activities, a professional paleontologist will be
retained to prepare and implement a PRMMP for the proposed project. The PRMMP will describe
the monitoring required during excavations that extend into older Quaternary (Pleistocene) age
sediments, and the location of areas deemed to have a high paleontological resource potential.
Part-time monitoring, or spot checking, may be required during shallow ground -disturbances (< 10
feet below ground surface) to confirm that sensitive geologic units are not being impacted.
Monitoring will entail the visual inspection of excavated or graded areas and trench sidewalls.
GEO-3 In the event that a paleontological resource is discovered, the monitor will have the authority to
temporarily divert the construction equipment around the find until it is assessed for scientific
significance and, if appropriate, collected. If the resource is determined to be of scientific
significance, the project paleontologist shall complete the following:
1. Salvage of Fossils. If fossils are discovered, all work in the immediate vicinity should be halted
to allow the paleontological monitor, and/or project paleontologist to evaluate the discovery
and determine if the fossil may be considered significant. If the fossils are determined to be
potentially significant, the project paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) should recover
them following standard field procedures for collecting paleontological as outlined in the
PRMMP prepared for the project. Typically, fossils can be safely salvaged quickly by a single
paleontologist and not disrupt construction activity. In some cases, larger fossils (such as
complete skeletons or large mammal fossils) require more extensive excavation and longer
salvage periods. In this case the paleontologist should have the authority to temporarily direct,
divert or halt construction activity to ensure that the fossil(s) can be removed in a safe and
timely manner.
2. Fossil Preparation and Curation. The PRMMP will identify the museum that has agreed to
accept fossils that may be discovered during project -related excavations. Upon completion of
fieldwork, all significant fossils collected will be prepared in a properly equipped laboratory to
a point ready for curation. Preparation may include the removal of excess matrix from fossil
materials and stabilizing or repairing specimens. During preparation and inventory, the fossils
specimens will be identified to the lowest taxonomic level practical prior to curation at an
accredited museum. The fossil specimens must be delivered to the accredited museum or
repository no later than 90 days after all fieldwork is completed. The cost of curation will be
assessed by the repository and will be the responsibility of the client.
GEO-4 Upon completion of ground disturbing activity (and curation of fossils if necessary) the project
paleontologist shall prepare a final mitigation and monitoring report outlining the results of the
mitigation and monitoring program. The report shall include discussion of the location, duration
and methods of the monitoring, stratigraphic sections, any recovered fossils, and the scientific
significance of those fossils, and where fossils were curated.
Austin Residence IS/MND 33 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.7.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
With implementation of Mitigation Measures GEC-1 through GEO-4, impacts associated with geology and soils
would be reduced to less than significant.
3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
3.8.1 Sources
• County of Riverside, County of Riverside Climate Action Plan Update, November 2019. Microsoft Word
- Riverside Countv CAP Final Draft.docx (rctlma.ora)
3.8.2 Environmental Setting
Constituent gases of the Earth's atmosphere, called atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHG), play a critical role
in the Earth's radiation amount by trapping infrared radiation emitted from the Earth's surface, which
otherwise would have escaped to space. Prominent GHGs contributing to this process include carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), ozone, water vapor, nitrous oxide (NO2), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).
Anthropogenic (caused or produced by humans) emissions of these GHGs in excess of natural ambient
concentrations have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the Earth's natural climate, known as global
warming or climate change. GHG emissions are attributable to human activities associated with
industrial/manufacturing, agriculture, utilities, transportation, and residential land uses. Transportation is
responsible for 41 percent of the State's GHG emissions, followed by electricity generation. Emissions of CO2
and NO2 are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. Methane, a potent GHG, results from off -gassing associated
with agricultural practices and landfills. Sinks of CO2, where CO2 is stored outside of the atmosphere, include
uptake by vegetation and dissolution into the ocean.
3.8.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
Greenhouse Gas Emissions —Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have 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 gases?
a. Less than Significant Impact. The Project allows for the development of a private tennis court and spa
grotto; therefore, the main source of GHG emissions from the Project would come from construction. The
anticipated period of construction requiring fossil -fuel powered equipment would be approximately 2-4
weeks. Equipment would include the use of a backhoe, bobcat, or similar equipment, which generate
nominal carbon emissions that are well below the SCAQMD screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per
year. In addition, due to the nature of a tennis court and spa, the completed Project would not emit GHG
Austin Residence IS/MND 34 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
emissions. Therefore, the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e
per year. Impacts would be less than significant.
b. Less than Significant. The applicable plan for the Project is the City of La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Plan. The City of La Quinta's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan includes a comprehensive inventory of
greenhouse gas emissions generated City-wide, including those generated by local government activities.
Future emissions of greenhouse gasses are projected, reduction targets set, and policies and programs are
proposed as part of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. SCAQMD has set an interim screening threshold
of 3,000 MTCO2e for residential and commercial land use per year. Projects below this threshold are
considered to have less -than -significant GHG emissions. As mentioned in Section 3.8.3(a), the GHG
emissions generated by the Project would be below the SCAQMD threshold for residential development
of 3,000 MTCO2e. Based on the foregoing, the Project would not have the potential to conflict with any
applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
GHGs. Impacts would be less than significant.
3.8.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.8.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
3.9.1 Sources
• City of La Quinta General Plan, February 19, 2013.
• Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2010111094) for the City of La Quinta General Plan, July
2012.
https://www.laguin taca. qov/home/showpublisheddocument/15858/635338594527270000
State Water Resources Control Board, GeoTracker. Accessed August 10, 2021,
GeoTracker (ca.gov)
3.9.2 Environmental Setting
The Project site occurs in an area of the City of La Quinta that has undergone gradual urbanization since the
later decades of the 1900's. The general area is comprised primarily of residential, recreational, institutional,
and commercial development. A unique feature of the City of La Quinta is the inclusion of golf courses within
residential neighborhoods. The Project site is bordered by Avenida Fernando followed by the La Quinta Resort;
mountain slopes to the north and east; and an existing residence to the west. The site itself is composed of an
existing residence and the areas where the proposed improvements would be constructed are flat and
undeveloped land.
Austin Residence IS/MND 35 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.9.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS —Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
❑
❑
®
❑
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonable foreseeable upset
❑
❑
®
❑
and accident condition involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, 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 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 the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
❑
❑
❑
emergency evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
❑
❑
❑
involving wildland fires?
a. Less than Significant Impact. Proposed construction activities for the development of the Project are
very minor due to the nature of the Project and may involve the use and transport of limited hazardous
materials, which include but not limited to fuels, gasoline, hydraulic fluid, lubricants, and other liquids
associated with the operation of equipment utilized for construction. Additionally, transportation,
storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities would be required to
comply with all applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations. This includes the preparation
of a SWPPP that would outline specific BMPs that would be administered during the construction of the
Project in order to prevent the discharge of construction -related pollutants that could contaminate
nearby water sources. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA; 42 USC 6901 et seq.) would
require businesses with substantial quantities of hazardous materials to adhere to strict requirements in
regards to handlings, transportation, and storing of supplies. Furthermore, the Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. § 5101 et seq. protects against the risk to life, property, and the
Austin Residence IS/MND 36 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
environment that are associated in the transportation of hazardous materials in intrastate, interstate,
and foreign commerce. Upon completion of the proposed construction, all hazardous materials would
be removed from the Project site. Therefore, with all applicable regulations in place, impacts associated
with accidental release of hazardous substances during construction activities would be less than
significant.
Long-term operations of the Project would involve less than significant use of household chemicals,
including chemicals to maintain the water quality of the spa and the health of the landscaping. Therefore,
no significant impact would occur.
b. Less than Significant Impact. Accidents involving hazardous materials that could pose a significant
hazard to the public or the environment would be highly unlikely during the construction and long-term
operation of the Project and are not reasonably foreseeable. As discussed above under Section 3.9.3(a),
the transport, use, and handling of hazardous materials on the Project site during construction is a
standard risk on all construction sites, and there would be no greater risk for upset and accidents than
would occur on any other similar construction site. Upon buildout, the Project site would operate as a
tennis court and spa along with other minor site improvements. Based on the operational characteristics
of home improvements, there is limited use of hazardous substances; however, as discussed above
under Section 3.9.3(a), the Project Applicant would be required to comply with all applicable local, State,
and federal regulations related to the transport, handling, and usage of hazardous material. Accordingly,
impacts associated with the accidental release of hazardous materials would be less than significant
during both construction and long-term operation of the Project.
C. No Impact. The nearest schools to the Project site are John Adams Elementary School located at 50-800
Desert Club Drive and Benjamin Franklin Elementary School located at 77-800 Calle Tampico. The schools
are both within 0.8-mile to the southeast of the proposed Project site. Due to the nature of the proposed
use of the Project, there would be limited use of hazardous substances. Therefore, the proposed Project
would have a no impact on schools within a quarter mile of the site.
d. No Impact. According to the Department of Toxic Control Substances (DTCS), there are no Federal
Superfund sites within the vicinity of the Project site. All environmental cleanups and any permitted
hazardous material facilities are listed in the Envirostor database, including Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Lability Act (CERLA) sites as well. Additionally, according to the California
State Water Resources Control Board's GeoTracker, the Project site is not located within any cleanup sites.
The nearest cleanup site is the La Quinta Hotel, located at 49499 Eisenhower Drive, which is approximately
0.2-mile south from the Project site. The La Quinta Hotel contained a potential contaminant of concern:
gasoline. However, the case has been closed as of August 25, 1992. Therefore, the Project is not located
on or within the vicinity of a site that is listed as a hazardous materials site pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5. Thus, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
No impact would occur.
e. No Impact. The closest airport to the Project site is the Bermuda Dunes Airport, which is approximately 4.4
miles northeast of the Project site. The Project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area and not
within the Airport Land Use Compatibility Zones. Therefore, the Project would not result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the Project area. No impact would occur.
No Impact. The Project site does not contain any emergency facilities under existing conditions nor does
it serve as an emergency evacuation route, so there is no potential for the Project to adversely affect an
Austin Residence IS/MND 37 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
existing emergency response or evacuation plan. During construction and at Project buildout, the proposed
Project would be required to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles as required by
the City. As part of the City's discretionary review process, the City of La Quinta would review the Project
to ensure that appropriate emergency ingress and egress would be available to -and -from the proposed
improvements for public safety. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not impair
implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan, and no impact would occur.
g. No Impact. According to Map My County, the Project site is not located within a State Responsibility Area
(SRA) or a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). The Project site and its surrounding areas are not located within
a very high fire hazard area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No impact would
occur.
3.9.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.9.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
3.10.1 Sources
• FEMA Flood Map Service Center, 2022.
• Coachella Valley Water District, 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, 2020.
3.10.2 Environmental Setting
The Project site consists of a residential home under existing conditions. Retention basins would be
constructed to the north and west of the proposed tennis court and a retention basin south of the proposed
spa site to collect and store storm runoff generated during the 100-year design storm per City of La Quinta
drainage ordinance requirements.
3.10.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY— Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
❑
❑
®
❑
degrade surface or ground water quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
❑
❑
®
❑
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
Austin Residence IS/MND 38 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of the
❑
❑
®
❑
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
c.i.) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
❑
❑
®
❑
site;
c.ii.) Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
❑
❑
®
❑
flooding on- or offsite;
c.iii.) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
❑
❑
®
❑
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
c.iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
❑
❑
®
❑
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
❑
❑
❑
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
❑
❑
®
❑
management plan?
Less than Significant Impact. During construction of the Project and any future development would
require that the Project comply with South Coast Air Quality Management (SCAQMD) Rule 403 and 403.1.
This rule will assist in reducing fugitive dust and resulting PM10 emissions from made -made sources in
the Coachella Valley. Although these rules are intended to protect air quality, they would also assist in
supporting with water quality protection by preventing sediment track out and erosion. Therefore, the
proposed Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Impacts would be less than significant.
b. Less than Significant Impact. No potable groundwater wells are proposed by the Project and the Project
would be served with potable water by Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The primary source of
water in the Coachella Valley is groundwater extracted by deep wells and replenished with Colorado River
Water. The CVWD would provide domestic water service to the Project and is a participant in the
Coachella Valley Regional Water Management Group that prepared an Integrated Regional Water
Management Plan (WMP) in 2018. The 2018 Integrated Regional WMP determined that long-term
regional demand for potable water is expected to increase; however, with continued conservation
measures and replenishment of groundwater, sufficient supplies would be available to meet the
projected demand. As such, Project water demands have already been accounted for within the 2018
Integrated Regional WMP and sufficient water supplies exist to serve the Project.
At Project buildout, nominal amounts water will be used for landscaping, maintenance of the spa, and for
maintaining cleanliness of the tennis courts and walkways. The site is connected to an existing water line
Austin Residence IS/MND 39 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
on Avenida Fernando. No new wells or additional water infrastructure are proposed. The Project would
be required to comply with the CVWD's and the City's water -efficiency requirements, such as including
the use of drought -tolerant planting materials and limited landscaping irrigation. The Project would also
be required to comply with the CVWD's drought restrictions and water reduction measures as applicable.
Therefore, compliance and implementation of CVWD and City requirements would ensure that the
Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge. Impacts would be less than significant.
c. i-iv. Less than Significant Impact. The Project would involve the construction of a tennis court which would
increase impervious surface area which could increase runoff and alter drainage patterns. However,
Prior to development of the Project site, the City will review and approve the proposed civil plans to
ensure the proposed development is in compliance with the City's Municipal Code, which requires the
Project to retain the runoff volume from a 100-year, 24-hour storm event for the entire Project site. In
addition, the Project would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 and 403.1 as well as all
applicable City requirements, which would ensure the design of the Project would not result in erosion
or siltation on- or off -site. Therefore, the Project would result in a less -than -significant impact to
downstream water bodies.
d. No Impact. The Project site is located within Zone X, which is an area of minimal flood hazard and not
within the 100-year nor 500-year flood plain. Furthermore, the Project site is not located within the
vicinity of any other water bodies. Due to the Project site location being far away from the ocean and far
away from any lakes or dams, there is no possibility of dam failure, tsunami or seiche. Therefore, no
impacts would occur.
e. Less than Significant Impact. As described in Section 2.10.3 (b), Project water demand has already been
accounted for in the 2018 Integrated Regional WMP and sufficient water supplies exist to serve the
Project. The Project will adhere to all applicable water quality standards for both construction and
operational activities. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Impacts would be less than
significant.
3.10.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.10.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.11 Land Use and Planning
3.11.1 Sources
• City of La Quints, City of La Quints 2035 General Plan, Adopted February 19, 2013.
• City of La Quinta, Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2010111094) for the City of La Quinta
General Plan, July 2012.
https://www.la puintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/15858/635338594527270000
Austin Residence IS/MND 40 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.11.2 Environmental Setting
Under existing conditions, the Project site is designated as "Open Space - Natural" per the City's General Plan
2035 Land Use Map and the Project site is zoned "Open Space (OS)" and within the "Hillside Conservation
Overlay" per the City's Official Zoning Map.
The Project site is bordered by Avenida Fernando followed by the La Quinta Resort; mountain slopes to the
north and east; and an existing residence to the west. The site itself is composed of an existing residence and
the areas where the proposed improvements would be constructed are flat and undeveloped land.
3.11.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
LAND USE AND PLANNING — Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established 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
❑
❑
®
❑
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
No Impact. Development of the Project would not physically disrupt or divide the arrangement of an
established community. The Project site is bordered by Avenida Fernando followed by the La Quinta
Resort; mountain slopes to the north and east; and an existing residence to the west. The site itself is
composed of an existing residence and the areas where the proposed improvements would be
constructed are flat and undeveloped land. No impact would occur.
b. Less Than Significant Impact. The development of the Project would consist of a tennis court, spa, and
other associated improvements. Under existing conditions, the Project site is designated as "Open Space
— Natural" per the City's General Plan 2035 Land Use Map and zoned "Open Space" and within the
"Hillside Conservation Overlay" per the City's Official Zoning Map. Although private tennis courts and spas
are not listed as permitted uses in the OS Zone/HC overlay, unlisted uses could be permitted in accordance
with Section 9.20.040 of the City's Municipal Code. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with the
City's General Plan or Zoning Code. Additionally, the Project received a determination letter on October
25, 2021 from the Design and Development director for the City of La Quinta to permit these uses per this
section.
The Project also would not conflict with any applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the SCAQMD's
AQMP, SCAG's Connect SoCal, and SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan. Impacts would be less than
significant.
3.11.4 Mitigation
No mitigation required.
Austin Residence IS/MND 41 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.11.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.12 Mineral Resources
3.12.1 Sources
City of La Quinta, Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2010111094) for the City of La Quinta
General Plan, July 2012.
https://www.laguintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/15858/635338594527270000
3.12.2 Environmental Setting
The majority of the City of La Quinta is located in mineral resource zone 1 (MRZ-1), which indicates that little
likelihood exists for the presence of significant mineral resources. The western portion of the City is located in
MRZ-3, which are areas containing known or inferred mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resources
significances. According to Exhibit III-11, Mineral Resource Zone Map, of the City's General Plan EIR, the Project
site is located within MRZ-3.
3.12.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
MINERAL RESOURCES — Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of 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 general plan, specific plan, or
other land use plan?
a-b. Less Than Significant Impact. According to the City's General Plan EIR, the Project site is located in an
MRZ-3 zone, which indicates it is located in an area containing known or inferred mineral occurrences
of undetermined mineral resources significances. The Project site is currently designated Natural Open
Space under the City's General Plan and zoned Open Space. Neither the existing land use or zoning
designation allow for mineral production. In addition, the General Plan consists of several policies that
would protect mineral resources and prevent land use incompatibility impacts from mining.
Furthermore, if a potential mineral extraction operation were to be located within the Project site, it
would be incompatible both with the land use designation and surrounding land uses. Therefore,
development of the Project would result in a less -than -significant impact relating to mineral resources.
3.12.4 Mitigation
No mitigation required.
Austin Residence IS/MND 42 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.12.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.13 Noise
3.13.1 Sources
• Google Earth, 2022.
• City of La Quinta, Municipal Code, 2022.
https.Illibrary.municode.comlca/la puinta/codes/municipal code
3.13.2 Environmental Setting
Noise
Noise has been defined as an unwanted sound. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal
activities, when it causes actual physical harm or when it has adverse effects on health. Noise is measured on
a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). A -weighted decibels (dBA) approximate
the subjective response of the human ear to broad frequency noise source by discriminating against very low
and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which
are audible to the human ear.
Vibration
According to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise Impact and Vibration Assessment Manual,
vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object. The rumbling sound caused by the vibration of room
surfaces is called structure -borne noise. Sources of vibrations include natural or human made causes. In
addition, vibration sources may be continuous such as, factory machinery, or transient, such as explosions.
There are several different methods that are used to quantify vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) is
defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal. The PPV is most frequently used to
describe vibration impacts to buildings. Human body responds to average vibration amplitude often described
as the root mean square (RMS). The RMS amplitude is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the
signal and is most frequently used to describe the effect of vibration on the human body. Decibel notation
(VdB) is commonly used to measure RMS. Decibel notation (VdB) serves to reduce the range of numbers used
to describe human response to vibration. Typically, ground -borne vibration generated by man-made activities
attenuates rapidly with distance from the source of the vibration.
3.13.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
NOISE — Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
❑
❑
®
❑
vicinity of the project in excess of standards
Austin Residence IS/MND 43 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration
❑
❑
®
❑
or groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
❑
❑
❑
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
a. Less than Significant Impact. Construction noise is considered a short-term impact and would be
considered significant if construction activities are undertaken outside the allowable times as described in
the City's Municipal Code (Section 6.08.050(A)). Construction is anticipated to occur during the permissible
hours (7 AM to 7 PM) according to the City's Municipal Code. In addition, the construction would be short
in duration and equipment used would consist of a backhoe, bobcat, or small front loader, which would
emit minimal amounts of noise. The Project consists of a tennis court and spa grotto, which would result
in minimal operational noise levels. Minimal traffic would be generated from the Project and minimal noise
would be generated from operational use of the Project. In conclusion, the Project is not expected to
generate noise levels beyond the noise ordinance standards and impacts would be less than significant.
b. Less than Significant Impact. The Project does not propose or require uses or activities that would be
considered substantive sources of on -going vibration. The Project consists of a tennis court and spa grotto,
which would result in nominal construction and operational noise levels. The construction would be short
in duration and equipment would consist of a backhoe, bobcat, or small front loader, which would create
negligible noise levels. Therefore, the Project would not result in or cause exposure of persons to, or
generation of, excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. Impacts would be less than
significant.
c. No Impact. The closest airport to the Project site is the Bermuda Dunes Airport, which is approximately
4.4 miles northeast of the Project site. The Project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area and
not within the Airport Land Use Compatibility Zones. Therefore, the Project would not expose people
residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels associated with airports. No impact would
occur.
3.13.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.13.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
Austin Residence IS/MND 44 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.14 Population and Housing
3.14.1 Sources
• United States Census Bureau, Quickfacts. July 1, 2019.
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/laquintacitVcalifornia/PST045219
3.14.2 Environmental Setting
According to the United States Census Bureau, the City of La Quinta had a population of 41,748 in 2019, and
the population increased by 11.4% from 2010. The number of households from 2015-2019 was 15,948 with an
average household size at 2.57 persons per household.
3.14.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
❑
❑
❑
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of
❑
❑
❑
replacement housing elsewhere?
a. No Impact. The proposed development of a private tennis court and spa at an existing residence would
not induce population growth either directly or indirectly. Furthermore, no roads or infrastructure would
need to be extended to serve the Project. No impact would occur.
b. No Impact. The proposed development of a private tennis court and spa would be added to an existing
residence. No structures or housing would be eliminated as a result of the Project and no persons would
be displaced. Therefore, there would be no impacts relating to the displacement of people or housing.
3.14.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.14.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
Austin Residence IS/MND 45 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.15 Public Services
3.15.1 Sources
• City of La Quinta, City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan, Adopted February 19, 2013.
• City of La Quinta, Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2010111094) for the City of La Quinta
General Plan, July 2012.
https://www.laguintaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/15858/635338594527270000
3.15.2 Environmental Setting
Fire Protection Services
Fire protection is provided through a contract with the Riverside County Fire Department. There are three City -
owned fire stations, each staffed with full-time paid and volunteer firefighters: Fire Station No. 32 at 78-111
Avenue 52; Fire Station No. 70 at 54001 Madison Street; and Fire Station No. 93 at 44-555 Adams Street.
Average Fire Department response times are between 5 and 7 minutes. La Quinta has an Insurance Service
Office (ISO) of 4, based on a scale of 1 through 10, with 1 being the highest rating. Ratings are reviewed
periodically. A variety of criteria are used to determine the ISO rating, such as staffing levels, response times,
safety history and building code standards.
Police Protection Services
The City of La Quinta's sheriff station (Riverside County Sheriff's Department) is located at 86-625 Airport
Boulevard, Thermal, CA 92274 The Civil Center Community Policing Office is located at 78-495 Calle Tampico,
La Quinta, CA 92253.
Schools
There are two school districts providing public education to students in Kindergarten through 12t" grade in La
Quinta: Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD) and Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD).
Developers are required to pay school mitigation fees for residential and commercial development, which
includes the proposed Project.
Parks
The City of La Quinta currently operates 11 City parks, the Civic Center Campus, and three nature preserve
areas. The City of La Quinta also contains one public and 22 privately owned and operated golf courses, seven
of which are open and available for public use. The City of La Quinta's designated recreational open space
totals approximately 5,259 acres.
3.15.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
PUBLIC SERVICES
Austin Residence IS/MND 46 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new of 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:
i) Fire Protection?
❑
❑
❑
ii) Police Protection?
❑
❑
❑
iii) Schools?
❑
❑
❑
iv) Parks?
❑
❑
❑
v) Other public facilities?
I
❑
❑
❑
a-i. No Impact. Fire protection services in La Quinta are provided through a contract with the Riverside County
Fire Department (RCFD). The nearest fire station (No. 32) is located at 78-111 Avenue 52, approximately
1.3 miles southeast from the Project site. Based on the Project site's proximity to the existing fire station,
the Project would be adequately served by fire protection services during construction, and no new or
expanded unplanned facilities would be required. No impact would occur.
a-ii. No Impact. The La Quinta Police Department serves under contract by the Riverside County Sheriff's
Department. The community policing office is located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, which is approximately
1.2 miles southeast from the Project site. Based on the Project site's proximity to the existing community
policing office, the Project would be adequately served by police protection services during Project
construction, and no new or expanded unplanned facilities would be required.. No impact would occur.
a-iii. No Impact. The nearest school to the Project site are John Adams Elementary School located at 50-800
Desert Club Drive and Benjamin Franklin Elementary School located at 77-800 Calle Tampico. The schools
are both within 0.8-mile to the southeast of the proposed Project site. Due to the nature of the Project,
the Project would not increase the number of students at nearby schools. Therefore, no impacts would
occur.
a -iv. No Impact. The City of La Quinta requires new developments to dedicate land for recreational purposes
or pay in -lieu fees. However, the Project only involves improvements to an existing residence, which
would not contribute to any park impacts. No impact would occur.
a-v. No Impact. The Project would not impact other public facilities. The Project would not increase the
population that would require the provision of additional public facilities within the City of La Quinta.
Access to the Project site is provided by an existing road, Avenida Fernando, and would connect to existing
utility infrastructure. New public roads or public transportation facilities, or other public facilities, are not
required. No impact would occur.
Austin Residence IS/MND 47 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.15.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.15.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.16 Recreation
3.16.1 Sources
• City of La Quinta, City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan, Adopted February 19, 2013.
• City of La Quinta, Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2010111094) for the City of La Quinta
General Plan, July 2012.
https://www.1oquin taca. qov/home/showpublisheddocument/15858/635338594527270000
3.16.2 Environmental Setting
The City of La Quinta currently operates 11 City parks, the Civic Center Campus, and three nature preserve
areas. La Quinta's three nature preserves are also available for public recreation, as they all contain trails for
hiking and bicycling. There are also a number of public pocket parks located within existing subdivisions. La
Quinta is home to one public and 22 privately owned and operated golf courses, seven of which are open and
available for public use. La Quinta's designated recreational open space totals approximately 5,259 acres.
3.16.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
❑
❑
®
❑
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
❑
❑
®
❑
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
a/b. Less than Significant Impact. The project is construction of private recreational facilities and their impact
is being evaluated in this MND. Additionally, the Project's development of a private tennis court and spa
grotto would result in no population increase and no demand for park facilities. There is no potential for
the Project to increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur, as well as a low potential for
Austin Residence IS/MND 48 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which may have an adverse physical effect on the
environment. Therefore, the Project would have a less -than -significant impact on recreational facilities
within the City.
3.16.4 Mitigation
No mitigation required.
3.16.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.17 Transportation
3.17.1 Sources
• Google Earth, 2022.
• City of La Quinta Engineering Bulletin #06-13 — Traffic Impact Study Guidelines
EB 06-13 Traffic Study Guidelines - Final.pdf (laguintaca.gov)
3.17.2 Environmental Setting
Access to the Project site is provided by the existing road, Avenida Fernando. There are no bus stops within
the vicinity of the Project site and there is no sidewalk or bike lane along Avenida Fernando.
3.17.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
TRANSPORTATION — Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
❑
❑
❑
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent
with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
❑
❑
❑
(b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
❑
❑
❑
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access
❑
❑
❑
a. No Impact.
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is both attracted to and produced by a
development. Due to the nature of the Project as improvements to the existing residence, the Project
Austin Residence IS/MND 49 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
would not generate any trips to the site. As previously mentioned in Section 3.17.2, there are no bus
stops, sidewalks, or bike lanes within the vicinity of the Project site.
The Project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and no impact would occur.
b. No Impact. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 sets forth guidelines for implementing Senate Bill 743 (SB
743) for reduction of GHG emissions and development of multimodal transportation networks. SB 743
requires amendments to the CEQA Guidelines to provide for an alternative criteria to the LOS
methodology for evaluating transportation impacts. Generally, "vehicle miles travelled" or VMT is
considered as the most appropriate measurement of transportation impacts. VMT refers to the amount
and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project.
As discussed in sections 3.3.3(b-c), per the City of La Quinta VMT Analysis Policy and screening criteria for
development projects, the Project qualifies for small project screening criteria because its facilities would
be used primary by the current residents of the site, would not generate significant additional car trips,
would not increase the amount of VMT, and would therefore not emit significant amounts of carbon
dioxide equivalent (MTCO2). Therefore, no impact would occur.
c/d No Impact. No traffic would be generated from the Project. In addition, prior to development of the
Project site, the City will review and approve the proposed plans to ensure conformance with City design
standards and that no hazardous transportation design features would be introduced through
implementation of the Project. Accordingly, the Project would not create or substantially increase safety
hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use or result in inadequate emergency access. No impact
would occur.
3.17.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.17.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
3.18.1 Sources
• CRM TECH, Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report Assessor's Parcel Numbers 658-170-003
and -010, March 28, 2022. (Appendix B)
3.18.2 Environmental Setting
Today, Native Americans of Pass or Desert Cahuilla heritage are mostly affiliated with one or more of the Indian
reservations in and near the Coachella Valley, including Agua Caliente, Cabazon, Torres Martinez, Augustine,
and Morongo.
Austin Residence IS/MND 50 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
On December 10, 2021, CRM TECH submitted a request for a records search in the commission's Sacred Lands
File (SLF). The results for the SLF were negative. In response to CRM TECH's inquiry, the NAHC states in a letter
dated February 8, 2022, that the Sacred Lands File identified no Native American cultural resources in the
Project vicinity. Noting that the absence of specific information regarding cultural resources would not
necessarily preclude the presence of cultural resources, however, the NAHC recommended that local Native
American groups be consulted for further information and provided a referral list of 16 individuals associated
with 11 local Native American groups who may have knowledge of such resources.
3.18.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
TRIBL CULTURAL RESOURCES — Would the project:
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code
section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined
in terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
❑
®
❑
❑
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
❑
❑
❑
❑
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
a.i. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As previously discussed in Section 3.5.3(a), the City
currently does not have any sites listed within the City's incorporated boundaries on the National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the site is not listed in the California Register of Historic Resources
(CRHR). Mitigation Measure CUL-1 described in 3.5 Cultural Resources, will be applied to 3.18 Tribal
Resources, to ensure the protection of cultural resources. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation
Measure CUL-1, impacts would be less than significant.
a.ii. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As previously mentioned in Section 3.18.2, CRM
TECH contacted the NAHC on December 10, 2021 for review of the SLF. The NAHC responded stating
that the SLF was completed with negative results; however, the NAHC requested that 16 individuals
representing 11 Native American tribal groups be contacted to elicit information regarding cultural
Austin Residence IS/MND 51 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
resource issues related to the Project. One letter of response was received by the City of La Quinta on
September 16, 2022 from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) stating that the project area
is not located within the boundaries of the ACBCI Reservation. However, the ACBCI requestion Mitigation
Measures TRI-1 and TRI-2. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts will be less
than significant.
3.18.4 Mitigation
TRI-1 Should human remains be discovered during construction of the proposed project, the project
contractor would be subject to either the State law regarding the discovery and disturbance of
human remains or the Tribal burial protocol. In either circumstance all destructive activity in the
immediate vicinity shall halt and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health
and Safety Code §7050.5. If the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted. The NAHC will make a determination
of the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The City and Developer will work with the designated MLD
to determine the final disposition of the remains.
TRI-2 Should cultural resources be found during construction, work should be stopped until a qualified
archaeologist can evaluate the find and the Tribe has been contacted.
See Section 3.5.4 for Mitigation Measure CUL-1.
3.18.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
With the incorporation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, impacts to tribal cultural resources would be reduced to
less than significant.
3.19 Utilities and Services
3.19.1 Sources
• City of La Quinta, City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan, Adopted February 19, 2013.
• City of La Quinta, Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2010111094) for the City of La Quinta
General Plan, July 2012.
https://www.laguintaca. qov/home/showpublisheddocument/15858/635338594527270000
3.19.2 Environmental Setting
Domestic Water
Domestic water for the majority of the City is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD).
Groundwater is the principal source of municipal water supply in the Coachella Valley. The main groundwater
source for the entire valley is the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin, Indio Subbasin, and the Whitewater
River Subbasin. The Whitewater River Subbasin underlies a major portion of the valley floor and encompasses
approximately 400 square miles.
Wac,ta Water
Austin Residence IS/MND 52 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
CVWD also provides wastewater and sewage collection and treatment services in the City and Sphere of
Influence (SOI). CVWD sewer lines utilize a system of trunk lines ranging in diameter from 4 to 24 inches. There
are two CVWD wastewater treatment plants that serve La Quinta. Water Reclamation Plant 7 (WRP-7) is
located at Madison Street and Avenue 38, northeast of the City in Indio. It provides wastewater treatment for
development in the City north of Miles Avenue. The capacity of WRP-7 is 5 million gallons per day (mgd), and
the plant processes approximately 2.8 to 3.0 mgd. It has the capacity to expand to 7.5 mgd. The Mid -Valley
Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4), located in Thermal, serves lands in the City and Sphere that are located
south of Miles Avenue. The Mid -Valley plant has a current capacity of just under 10 mgd, and processes
approximately 5 mgd.
Snlirl WactP
Solid waste disposal services in the City of La Quinta are provided by the commercial vendor, Burrtec. Solid
waste collected from the City of La Quinta residents and businesses is hauled to the Edom Hill Transfer Station
in Cathedral City and is then transported to Lambs Canyon in the City of Beaumont.
3.19.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS — Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas,
❑
❑
❑
❑
or telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
❑
❑
®
❑
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
❑
❑
®
❑
project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
❑
❑
®
❑
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
❑
❑
®
❑
regulations related to solid waste?
a-e. Less than Significant Impact.
Domestic Water
Austin Residence IS/MND 53 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
CVWD provides domestic water services to the Project site. The Project is going to remain consistent with
the designated land use, and CVWD based its water demand calculations for its UWMP on the City's
anticipated land use plan. Additionally, the Project would be required to implement all water conservation
measures imposed by CVWD under normal as well as drought conditions over the life of the Project. These
include requirements of Executive Order B-29-15, mandating reductions in water use by 36% in the
Coachella Valley. CVWD has, in response to the Executive Order, adopted restrictions on water use that
include limiting days on which landscaping can be irrigated; a prohibition on the use of fountains or water
features; a prohibition on irrigation by any means other than drip or micro -spray systems; and a
requirement that hotels offer their guests the option of not having towels and linens laundered daily.
Should additional restrictions or regulations be implemented, the Project would be required to comply
with them also. No new wells or additional water infrastructure or entitlements will be required. Based
on the foregoing, CVWD would be able to fulfill the Project's demand during normal and dry years.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Warta Wartr
The Project would not generate any wastewater. The proposed private spa would be a closed loop system,
which would contain a filter that would clean the water and allow for the water to circulate.
Stnrmwatar
The City requires on -site retention basins for all new developments to manage surface water flows and
reduce runoff from sources such as stormwater and landscape irrigation. The Project complies with this
requirement by including on -site retention basins to ensure stormwater is retained on -site. Additional
measures to address onsite stormwater management are described in Section 3.10, Hydrology and Water
Quality. Project -related impacts to stormwater management systems are expected to be less -than -
significant. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Snlid Warta
Solid waste disposal service for the City would be provided by Burrtec, which is required to meet all local,
regional, state, and federal standards for solid waste disposal. The Project would not generate any solid
waste; therefore, no impacts would occur.
3.19.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.19.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
3.20 Wildfire
3.20.1 Sources
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), Map of CAL FIRE's Fire Severity
Zones in Local Responsibility Areas — Western Riverside County, December 24, 2009. Accessed August
13, 2021 https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6754/fhszl map60.pdf
CAL FIRE, Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA, November 7, 2007. Accessed August 31, 2021
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6752/fhszs map60.pdf
Austin Residence IS/MND 54 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.20.2 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within an area of the City that is developed. According to CAL FIRE maps, the Project
site is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone or a fire hazard severity zone in a State
Responsibility Area (SRA).
3.20.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
WILDFIRE — If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
❑
❑
❑
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose
project occupants to, pollutant concentrations
❑
❑
❑
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or
❑
❑
❑
other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
❑
❑
❑
landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
a-d. No Impact. The Project site is not located in or near SRA or lands within a very high fire hazard severity
zone; therefore, the Project would not exacerbate wildfire hazard risks or expose people or the environment
to adverse environmental effects related to wildfires. As such, no impact would occur.
3.20.4 Mitigation
No mitigation is required.
3.20.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
Not applicable.
Austin Residence IS/MND 55 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
3.21.1 Sources
All sources previously listed were used to support the conclusions made in this section.
3.21.2 Environmental Setting
The environmental setting for the Project site is summarized within Sections 2.1 through 2.20 of the Initial
Study for each environmental issue.
3.21.3 Impacts
Less than
Potentially
Significant with
Less than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish
or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
❑
®
❑
❑
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
❑
®
❑
❑
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
❑
❑
❑
❑
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
a. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. All impacts to the environment, including impacts to
habitat for fish and wildlife species, fish and wildlife populations, plant and animal communities, rare and
endangered plants and animals, and historical and pre -historical resources were evaluated as part of this
Initial Study. Throughout this Initial Study, where impacts were determined to be potentially significant,
mitigation measures have been imposed to reduce those impacts to less than significant. Accordingly, with
incorporation of the mitigation measures imposed throughout this Initial Study, the Project would not
substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
Austin Residence IS/MND 56 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
Impacts would be reduced to less -than -significant levels with mitigation incorporated.
b. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The environmental evaluation of this Initial Study
concluded that, with adherence to all mitigation measures the Project's cumulatively considerable impacts
would be mitigated to less -than -significant levels.
c. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project could result in environmental impacts to
humans directly or indirectly. All Project environmental impacts would be less than significant or less than
significant with mitigation incorporated. The Project would therefore not result in environmental effects
which would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
3.21.4 Mitigation
AES-1
During Project construction and long-term operation, the Project shall eliminate all nonessential
lighting throughout the Project area and avoid or limit the use of artificial light during the hours of
dawn and dusk when many wildlife species are most active. Ensure that all lighting for Project is fully
shielded, cast downward, reduced in intensity to the greatest extent, and does not result in lighting
trespass including glare onto other properties —including any areas of the adjacent Santa Rosa and San
Jacinto Mountains Conservation Area —or upward into the night sky (see the International Dark -Sky
Association standards at http://darksky.org/). Use LED lighting with a correlated color temperature of
3,000 Kelvins or less, properly dispose of hazardous waste, and recycle lighting that contains toxic
compounds with a aualified recvcler.
13I0-1 The Project developer shall ensure the installation of Peninsular bighorn sheep (PBS) fence, either at
project buildout or through granting to Coachella Valley Conservation Commission an easement for
the future construction of such a fence, and further, that if an easement is to be granted, it shall be
recorded prior to the issuance of any grading permits. Upon recordation of a fence easement and
establishment of a financial instrument (or plans for fence construction at the time of project buildout),
as well as revision of the lighting plan (outlined in Mitigation Measure AES-1), this Project may be
considered fully consistent with the CVMSHCP. If, during subsequent review of the Project, it is
determined that any of the above conditions have not been met, or that the Project impacts differ
significantly from those reviewed in the Joint Project Review (including a fence alignment above the
toe of slope), this consistency determination shall be rendered null and void
BI0-2 Nesting bird surveys shall be performed by a qualified avian biologist no more than 3 days prior
to vegetation removal or ground -disturbing activities. Pre -construction surveys shall focus on both
direct and indirect evidence of nesting, including nest locations and nesting behavior. The qualified
avian biologist will make every effort to avoid potential nest predation as a result of survey and
monitoring efforts. If active nests are found during the pre -construction nesting bird surveys, a
qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate nest buffer to be marked on the ground. Nest buffers
are species specific and shall be at least 300 feet for passerines and 500 feet for raptors. A smaller
or larger buffer may be determined by the qualified biologist familiar with the nesting phenology of
the nesting species and based on nest and buffer monitoring results. Established buffers shall
remain on site until a qualified biologist determines the young have fledged or the nest is no longer
active. Active nests and adequacy of the established buffer distance shall be monitored daily by
the qualified biologist until the qualified biologist has determined the young have fledged or the
Proiect has been
Austin Residence IS/MND 57 February 2023
3 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
completed. The qualified biologist has the authority to stop work if nesting pairs exhibit signs of
rlitturhanra
1310-3 The Applicant shall pay the CVMSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee prior to building permit
issuance.
CUL-1 A qualified archaeologist monitor shall be present during any ground disturbing activities during the
project construction phase. In the case that archaeological materials are encountered during ground
disturbing activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery shall cease and any deposits shall be
treated according to federal, State, and local guidelines. No further grading is permitted in the area of
the discovery until the City approves the appropriate measure to protect the discovered resources.
CUL-2 In the event that human remains are uncovered during ground disturbing activities on the project site,
no further disturbance shall occur and all work shall cease until the County Coroner has made a
determination of the origin and disposition of the remains. Ground disturbing activities and
excavations shall not resume until the following has been addressed:
1. The County Coroner has been contacted and determined that no investigation to the cause of
death is required, and
2. If the County Coroner determines that the remains are of Native American decent, the Coroner
must notify Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will then determine the Most
Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of
notification and may recommend means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the
human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resource Code Section
5097.98.
TRI-1 Should human remains be discovered during construction of the proposed project, the project
contractor would be subject to either the State law regarding the discovery and disturbance of human
remains or the Tribal burial protocol. In either circumstance all destructive activity in the immediate
vicinity shall halt and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code
§7050.5. If the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted. The NAHC will make a determination of the Most Likely
Descendent (MLD). The City and Developer will work with the designated MLD to determine the final
disposition of the remains.
TRI-2 Should cultural resources be found during construction, work should be stopped until a qualified
archaeologist can evaluate the find and the Tribe has been contacted.
3.21.5 Level of Significance after Mitigation
With incorporation of the above mentioned mitigation measures, all Project -related impacts in regard to
Mandatory Findings of Significance would be reduced to less than significant.
Austin Residence IS/MND 58 February 2023
4 REFERENCES
Chapter 4 Report Preparers
Lead Agency
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
The Altum Group
Anna Choudhuri Environmental Lead
Rich Malacoff Senior Planner
Jordan Parrish Associate Planner
Viewshed Study
Stephen Nieto, Director of Urban Design + Land Development
Subconsultants
Biological Resources
Travis McGill, Director — ELMT Consulting
Cultural Resources
Bai "Tom" Tang, Principal Investigator — CRM TECH
Michael Hogan, Principal — CRM Tech
Austin Residence IS/MND 59 February 2023