PC Resolution 2023-011 La Villetta at Ave 58; EA 2021-0006PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2023 - 011
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 80 DWELLING UNITS
LOCATED SOUTH OF AVENUE 58 BETWEEN MADISON
STREET AND MONROE STREET
CASE NUMBER:
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2021-0006
APPLICANT: ROYAL INVESTORS GROUP LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did, on
June 13, 2023, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Royal
Investors Group LLC, for an 80-unit planned unit development located at south of
Avenue 58 between Madison Street and Monroe Street, more commonly described as:
764-180-002 and 764-180-003
WHEREAS, the Design and Development Department published a public hearing
notice in The Desert Sun newspaper on June 2, 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 [Exhibit A]:
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.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2023-011
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2021-0006
PROJECT: LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
ADOPTED: JUNE 13, 2023
Page 2 of 2
3. The proposed project will not have environmental effects that adversely affect the
human population, either directly or indirectly. Potential impacts can be mitigated
to be less than significant.
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 recommend adoption of
Environmental Assessment 2021-0006 with mitigation measures incorporated [Exhibit A].
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on June 13, 2023, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Caldwell, Guerrero, Hassett, McCune, Nieto,
Tyerman, and Chairperson Currie
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Q
RETTA CURRIE, Chairperson
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DANNY CASTRO, Design and Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2023-011
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2021-0006
PROJECT: LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
ADOPTED: JUNE 13, 2023 A
EXHIBIT A
LA VILLETTA
AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
LEAD AGENCY:
City of La Quinta
78495 Ca Ile Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Contact: 5iji Fernandez
760.777.7086
ta
Qab&a
— UM ofrhu MISER-r —
PREPARED BY:
VC5 Environmental
30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
Contact: Dan Bott
949.489.2700
VC5 Environmental
EXPERTS IN STRATEGI[ 50LUTIONS
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
La Villetta at Avenue 58
Environmental Assessment
ta ow fr(v
GEM of the DESERT —
LEAD AGENCY:
City of la Quinta
Planning Department
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Contact: Siji Fernandez
760.777.7086
PREPARED BY:
VCS Environmental
30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
Contact: Dan Bott
949.489.2700
June 2023
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
Environmental Checklist................................................................................................................1-1
1.1
Background......................................................................................................................1-1
1.2
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected.....................................................................1-2
1.3
Lead Agency Determination.............................................................................................1-3
1.4
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts...............................................................................
1-4
2.0
Introduction
..................................................................................................................................2-1
2.1
Statutory Authority and Requirements............................................................................2-1
2.2
Purpose............................................................................................................................2-1
2.3
Incorporation by Reference.............................................................................................2-1
2.4
Consultations....................................................................................................................2-2
3.0
Project Description........................................................................................................................3-1
3.1
Proposed Project..............................................................................................................3-1
3.2
Site Location.....................................................................................................................3-1
3.3
Existing Site Physical Setting.............................................................................................3-1
3.4
Existing Land Use Setting..................................................................................................3-1
3.5
Project Characteristics......................................................................................................
3-6
3.6
Construction Activities...................................................................................................
3-34
3.7
Requested Project Approvals/Permitting.......................................................................3-36
4.0
Environmental
Analysis..............................................................................................................4.1-1
4.1
Aesthetics......................................................................................................................4.1-1
4.2
Agriculture and Forestry Resources..............................................................................4.2-1
4.3
Air Quality......................................................................................................................4.3-1
4.4
Biological Resources......................................................................................................4.4-1
4.5
Cultural Resources........................................................................................................4.5-1
4.6
Energy...........................................................................................................................4.6-1
4.7
Geology and Soils..........................................................................................................4.7-1
4.8
Greenhouse Gas Emissions...........................................................................................4.8-1
4.9
Hazards and Hazardous Materials.................................................................................4.9-1
4.10
Hydrology and Water Quality......................................................................................4.10-1
4.11
Land Use and Planning................................................................................................4.11-1
4.12
Mineral Resources.......................................................................................................4.12-1
4.13
Noise...........................................................................................................................4.13-1
4.14
Population and Housing..............................................................................................4.14-1
4.15
Public Services.............................................................................................................4.15-1
4.16
Recreation...................................................................................................................4.16-1
4.17
Transportation.............................................................................................................4.17-1
4.18
Tribal Cultural Resources.............................................................................................4.18-1
4.19
Utilities and Service Systems.......................................................................................4.19-1
4.20
Wildfire........................................................................................................................4.20-1
Public Review Draft I June 2023 i Table of Contents
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................................4.21-1
4.22 References..................................................................................................................4.22-1
5.0 Inventory of Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................5-1
6.0 Report Preparation Personnel.......................................................................................................6-1
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C1
Appendix C2
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F1
Appendix F2
Appendix G
Appendix H1
Appendix H2
Appendix I
Appendix J
Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis
Biological Technical Report
Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment
Historical Resource Analysis Report
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report
Water Quality Management Plan
Preliminary Hydrology Report
Noise Impact Analysis
Traffic Impact Analysis Report
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Assessment
Public Services/Utilities Correspondence
AB 52/SB 18 Correspondence
Public Review Draft I June 2023 ii Table of Contents
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1
Regional Location........................................................................
Figure3-2
Vicinity Map................................................................................
Figure 3-3a
Site Photograph Locations...........................................................
Figure 3-3b
Existing Site Photographs............................................................
Figure 3-4
Existing and Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations.......
Figure 3-5
Existing and Proposed Zoning .....................................................
Figure 3-6
Typical Cluster.............................................................................
Figure 3-7
Tentative Tract Map 37950.........................................................
Figure 3-8
Building Design and Characteristics ............................................
Figure 3-9a
Spanish Elevations.......................................................................
Figure 3-9b
Spanish Elevations.......................................................................
Figure 3-9c
Spanish Elevations.......................................................................
Figure 3-10a
Mediterranean Elevations...........................................................
Figure 3-10b
Mediterranean Elevations...........................................................
Figure 3-10c
Mediterranean Elevations...........................................................
Figure 3-11a
Santa Barbara Elevations.............................................................
Figure 3-11b
Santa Barbara Elevations.............................................................
Figure 3-11c
Santa Barbara Elevations.............................................................
Figure 3-12a
Color Schemes.............................................................................
Figure 3-12b
Color Boards—Spanish................................................................
Figure 3-12c
Color Boards— Mediterranean....................................................
Figure 3-12d
Color Boards —Santa Barbara ......................................................
Figure 3-13a
Recreation Center Elevation........................................................
Figure 3-13b
Recreation Center Floor Plan ......................................................
Figure 3-14
Conceptual Landscape Plan .........................................................
Figure 4.1-1
Image Corridor............................................................................
Figure4.1-2
Corridor View..............................................................................
Figure 4.4-1
Vegetation/Land Cover...............................................................
Figure 4.4-2
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Occurrences......
................................ 3-2
................................ 3-3
................................ 3-4
................................ 3-5
................................ 3-7
. 3-8
3-10
3-13
........ 3-15
........ 3-16
........ 3-17
........ 3-18
........ 3-19
........ 3-20
........ 3-21
........3-22
........ 3-23
........ 3-24
........ 3-25
........ 3-26
........ 3-27
........ 3-28
........ 3-29
........ 3-30
........ 3-31
....... 4.1-3
.......4.1-4
. 4.4-3
. 4.4-6
Public Review Draft I June 2023 iii Table of Contents
Figure 4.4-3
Tree Inventory Map............................................................
Figure 4.10-1
National Flood Hazard Map ................................................
Figure 4.13-1
Field Noise Monitoring Locations .......................................
Figure 4.17-1
Existing Roadway Conditions and Intersection Controls ....
Figure 4.17-2
Project Trip Distribution Pattern ........................................
Figure 4.17-3
AM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volumes ..............................
Figure 4.17-4
PM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volumes ..............................
Figure 4.17-5
Proposed Site Plan..............................................................
Figure 4.20-1
Fire Hazard Severity Zones .................................................
Figure 4.21-1
Cumulative Project Location Map ......................................
Figure 4.21-2
AM Peak Hour Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes..........
Figure 4.21-3
PM Peak Hour Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes..........
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.4-14
. 4.10-11
... 4.13-8
...4.17-5
.... 4.17-7
.... 4.17-9
..4.17-10
..4.17-16
.... 4.20-2
.... 4.21-4
.. 4.21-15
..4.21-16
Public Review Draft I June 2023 iv Table of Contents
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1
Surrounding Land Uses.....................................................................................................3-6
Table 3-2
Project Open Space Areas................................................................................................
3-9
Table 3-3
Land Use Statistical Summary........................................................................................3-11
Table 3-4
Proposed Landscaping....................................................................................................3-32
Table3-5
Parking Summary...........................................................................................................3-32
Table 3-6
Utility Providers..............................................................................................................3-33
Table 3-7
CVUSD School Locations and Generation Factors for Multiple -Family Attached Units..3-34
Table 3-8
Summary of Construction Activities...............................................................................
3-35
Table 4.1-1
General Plan Consistency Analysis................................................................................4.1-5
Table 4.3-1
State and Federal Criteria Pollutant Standards.............................................................4.3-4
Table 4.3-2
Coachella Valley Portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin Attainment Status .......................4.3-5
Table 4.3-3
SCAQMD Regional Criteria Pollutant Emission Thresholds of Significance ..................4.3-10
Table 4.3-4
SCAQMD Local Air Quality Thresholds of Significance.................................................4.3-11
Table 4.3-5
Construction -Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions.......................................4.3-14
Table 4.3-6
Construction -Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions.............................................4.3-15
Table 4.3-7
Operational Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions......................................................4.3-16
Table 4.3-8
Operations -Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions...............................................4.3-17
Table 4.4-1
Vegetation Communities...............................................................................................4.4-2
Table 4.4-2
Special Status Species....................................................................................................4.4-4
Table 4.6-1
Proposed Project Compliance with Applicable General Plan Energy Policies................4.6-7
Table 4.8-1
Global Warming Potentials, Atmospheric Lifetimes and Abundances of GHGs ............4.8-3
Table 4.8-2
Project Related Greenhouse Gas Annual Emissions......................................................4.8-7
Table 4.8-3
Proposed Project Compliance with the La Quinta GHG Plan Policies............................4.8-8
Table4.10-1
Beneficial Use Descriptions.........................................................................................4.10-3
Table 4.10-2
Study Area Water Body Beneficial Uses......................................................................4.10-4
Table 4.10-3
303(d) Impaired Water Bodies....................................................................................4.10-4
Table 4.10-4
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan and Coachella Valley Water District
Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand........................................................4.10-7
Table 4.11-1
General Plan Land Use Consistency............................................................................4.11-2
Public Review Draft I June 2023 Table of Contents
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.11-2 Residential Planned Unit Development Standards......................................................4.11-7
Table 4.13-1 Federal Transit Administration Construction Noise Criteria........................................4.13-3
Table 4.13-2 Federal Transit Administration Construction Noise Criteria........................................4.13-4
Table 4.13-3 City of La Quinta Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments .......... 4.13-5
Table 4.13-4
City of La Quinta Exterior Noise Standards..................................................................4.13-6
Table 4.13-5
Existing (Ambient) Noise Measurement Results.........................................................4.13-7
Table 4.13-6
Construction Equipment Noise Emissions and Usage Factors.....................................4.13-9
Table 4.13-7
Construction Noise Levels at the Nearest Sensitive Receptors.................................4.13-11
Table 4.13-8
Existing Project Traffic Noise Contributions.............................................................4.13-12
Table 4.13-9
Future Year 2035 Project Traffic Noise Contributions..............................................4.13-12
Table 4.13-10
Proposed Homes Exterior Noise Levels from Avenue 58..........................................4.13-13
Table 4.15-1 CVUSD School Locations and Generation Factors for
Multiple -Family Attached Units...................................................................................4.15-3
Table 4.17-1
Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections...............................................4.17-3
Table 4.17-2
Project Trip Generation...............................................................................................4.17-6
Table 4.17-3
Existing Traffic with Ambient Growth with Project Traffic..........................................4.17-8
Table 4.17-4
Year 2045 with Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity..........................................4.17-11
Table 4.19-1
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan and Coachella Valley Water District
Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand........................................................4.19-3
Table 4.21-1
Related Cumulative Projects.......................................................................................4.21-3
Table 4.21-2
Cumulative Project Traffic Generation......................................................................4.21-13
Table 4.21-3
Existing with Ambient Growth With Project With Cumulative Projects ....................4.21-14
Table 4.21-4
Year 2045 with Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity..........................................4.21-14
Public Review Draft I June 2023 vi Table of Contents
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
1.1 Background
1. Project Title:
La Villetta at Avenue 58
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of La Quinta
Planning Department
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Siji Fernandez, Associate Planner
Telephone: 760.777.7086
4. Project Location:
The project site is located at 81891 Avenue 58, generally near the intersection of Avenue 58
and Monroe Street.
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
Kris Pinero
Project Manager
Rodeo Credit Enterprises, LLC
9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 708
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
6. General Plan Designation:
The City of La Quinta General Plan designates the project site as Low Density Residential.
7. Zoning:
The project site is zoned for Low Density Residential.
8. Description of Project:
The proposed project involves approval of a General Plan Amendment (from Low Density up
to 4.0 dwelling units per acre to Medium/High Density), a Zone Change (from Low Density
Residential to Medium/High Density), approval of a Conditional Use Permit (for a Planned Unit
Development) and approval of a Tentative Tract Map to allow for the development of 80 single-
family homes, a recreation area, open space lot and retention basin/open space on
approximately 9.7 gross acres. Refer to Section 3.0, Project Description, for a comprehensive
description of the proposed project.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 1-1 Environmental Checklist
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The project site is currently undeveloped and consists of a date palm orchard and heavily
vegetated terrain. The project site is situated within an urbanized setting and is surrounded to
the north by single-family residential across Avenue 58, single-family residential to the west
and vacant land to the east and south, planned for low density residential uses.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
Please refer to Section 3.6, Project Approvals and Permitting Agencies.
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally
affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to
Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for
consultation that includes, for example, the determination of
significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures
regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 (Assembly Bill [AB] 52), the City of La
Quinta has conducted the required outreach to the applicable Native American tribes. This
process is further discussed in Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources.
1.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Less Than Significant Impact With
Mitigation Incorporated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
❑
Aesthetics
❑
Agriculture and Forestry
❑
Air Quality
®
Biological Resources
®
Cultural Resources
❑
Energy
®
Geology and Soils
❑
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
®
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
®
Hydrology and Water Quality
❑
Land Use and Planning
❑
Mineral Resources
❑
Noise
❑
Population and Housing
❑
Public Services
❑
Recreation
®
Transportation
®
Tribal Cultural Resources
❑
Utilities and Service Systems
❑
Wildfire
®
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Public Review Draft I June 2023 1-2 Environmental Checklist
J?TQKW ?R?TCL9C36
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1.3 Lead Agency Determination
Based on the analysis conducted in this Initial Study, the City of La Quinta, as the Lead Agency, has
made the following determination:
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 or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
❑
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)
❑
has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on
attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only
the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or ❑
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is
required.
I find that the proposed project has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA
document (which either mitigated the project or adopted impacts pursuant to findings)
adopted/certified pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines and the County's adopted Local ❑
CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project is a component of the whole action analyzed in the
previously adopted/certified CEQA document.
I find that the proposed project has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA
document (which either mitigated the project or adopted impacts pursuant to findings)
adopted/certified pursuant to State and County CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or ❑
clarifications are needed to make the previous documentation adequate to cover the project
which are documented in this addendum to the earlier CEQA document (CEQA Section
15164).
I find that the proposed project has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA
document (which either mitigated the project or adopted impacts pursuant to findings)
adopted/certified pursuant to State and County CEQA Guidelines. However, there is
important new information and/or substantial changes have occurred requiring the
preparation of an additional CEQA document (ND or EIR) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15162 through 15163.
05/31/2023
Sign Date
Sijifredo Fernandez
Printed Name
WjgiFtta,;u E oAil c0. 01
/ +1
Gtokd rJPfcdjcgf
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1.4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
This Initial Study analyzes the potential construction related and long-term operation environmental
impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project. The issue areas evaluated in this
Initial Study include:
• Aesthetics
•
Mineral Resources
• Agriculture and Forestry Resources
•
Noise
• Air Quality
•
Population and Housing
• Biological Resources
•
Public Services
• Cultural Resources
•
Recreation
• Energy
•
Transportation
• Geology and Soils
•
Tribal Cultural Resources
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
•
Utilities and Service Systems
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
•
Wildfire
• Hydrology and Water Quality
•
Mandatory Findings of Significance
• Land Use and Planning
Public Review Draft I June 2023 1-4 Environmental Checklist
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2.0 INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all state and local government agencies
consider the environmental consequences of projects over which they have discretionary authority
before taking action on those projects. Pursuant to Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the
City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency and has the principal responsibility of approving the proposed
project. As the Lead Agency, the City of La Quinta is required to ensure that the proposed project
complies with CEQA and that the appropriate level of CEQA documentation is prepared. Through
preparation of an Initial Study as the Lead Agency, the City of La Quinta would determine whether to
prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration (ND) or Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND). Based on the conclusions of this Draft Initial Study, the City of La Quinta has
recommended that the appropriate level of environmental documentation forthe proposed project is
an MND. This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) analyzes the potential direct,
indirect, and cumulative effects associated with implementation of the proposed project.
2.1 Statutory Authority and Requirements
In accordance with CEQA (Public Resources Code Sections 21000-21177) and pursuant to Section
15063 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), the City of La Quinta as the Lead Agency,
is required to undertake the preparation of an Initial Study to determine whether the proposed project
would have a significant environmental impact. If the Lead Agency finds that there is no substantial
evidence that the project, either as proposed or as modified to include the mitigation measures
identified in the Initial Study, may cause a significant effect on the environment, the Lead Agency shall
prepare a Negative Declaration (or Mitigated Negative Declaration) for that project. (Section 21080(c),
Public Resources Code).
This Mitigated Negative Declaration, which may ultimately be adopted by the City of La Quinta in
accordance with CEQA, is intended as an informational document undertaken to describe the potential
environmental impacts of the project. However, the resulting documentation is not a policy document,
and its approval and/or certification neither presupposes nor mandates any actions on the part of
those agencies from whom permits, and other discretionary approvals would be required.
2.2 Purpose
Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines identifies global disclosure requirements for inclusion in an
Initial Study. Pursuant to those requirements, an Initial Study must include: (1) a description of the
project, including the location of the project; (2) an identification of the environmental setting; (3) an
identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix or other method, provided that
entries on a checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to
support the entries; (4) a discussion of ways to mitigate significant effects identified, if any; (5) an
examination of whether the project is compatible with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land
use controls; and (6) the name of the person or persons who prepared or participated in the
preparation of the IS.
2.3 Incorporation by Reference
The planning documents listed below were utilized during the preparation of this Initial Study. These
documents are incorporated by reference and were utilized throughout this IS/MND as the
Public Review Draft I June 2023 2-1 Introduction
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
fundamental planning documents that may apply to work on the project site. Background information
and policy information, as well as specific adopted rules and regulations pertaining to the City of La
Quinta were also relied upon throughout this document. The documents are available for review at
the City of La Quinta Planning Department, 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253.
City of La Quinta 2035 General Plan (Amended November 2013). The City of La Quinta General
Plan (General Plan) is a long-range guide for growth and development within the City. The
General Plan also provides guidance to preserve the qualities that define the natural and built
environment. The General Plan is divided into six chapters that contain goals, policies, and
programs which are intended to guide land use and development decisions. The General Plan
is also a tool to help City staff, City Commissions, and the City Council make land use and public
investment decisions and provides the framework for the City's Zoning Ordinance. The General
Plan Chapters include Chapter 1-Administration, Chapter 2 - Community Development, which
includes Land Use, Circulation, Livable Community, Economic Development, Park, Recreation
and Trails, Housing, Chapter 3 - Natural Resources, Chapter 4 - Environmental Hazards, Chapter
5 - Public Infrastructure and Chapter 6 - Glossary and Terms.
• The Codified Ordinances of the City of La Quinta. The Codified Ordinances of the City of La
Quinta (City Municipal Code), updated July 15, 2021, consists of codes and ordinances adopted
by the City. These include General Provisions, Administration, Revenue and Finance, Business
Regulations, Health and Sanitation, Historic Preservation, Building and Construction, Zoning,
Animals, Peace, Morals and Safety, Vehicles and Traffic, Subdivision and Streets and Sidewalks.
• City of La Quinta Zoning Code. The City Zoning Code is utilized to implement the General Plan
and provide a guide for the growth and development of land within the City. The City Zoning
Code contains development regulations for specified zoning districts within the City.
2.4 Consultations
AB 52 NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
California Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) established a formal consultation process for California tribes within
the CEQA process. AB 52 specifies that any project that may affect or cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource would require a lead agency to "begin
consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditional and culturally affiliated with the
geographic area of the proposed project." The City of La Quinta initiated tribal consultation for the
purposes of AB 52 for the proposed project in February 2023. Those tribes that have requested to be
listed on the City's notification list for the purposes of AB 52 were notified in writing via certified mail.
As part of this process, the City has provided notification to each of the listed tribes for the opportunity
to consult with the City regarding the proposed project.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 2-2 Introduction
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Proposed Project
The proposed project involves a request for approval of a General Plan Amendment from Low Density
up to 4 dwelling units per acre to Medium/High Density up to 12 dwelling units per acre, Zone Change
from Low Density Residential to Medium/High Density, Tentative Tract Map and Conditional Use
Permit for Planned Unit Development to allow for the development of 80 single-family homes, a
recreation area, an open space lot, and retention basin/open space on approximately 9.7 gross acres.
3.2 Site Location
Regionally, the project site is located in the City of La Quinta, within Coachella Valley in northern -
central Riverside County; refer to Figure 3-1, Regional Location. Assessor Parcel Numbers for the
project site are APNs 764-180-002 and 764-180-003. Regional access to the site would be provided
from Interstate 10 (1-10) via Monroe Street. Locally, the project site is located at 81891 Avenue 58,
generally near the intersection of Avenue 58 and Monroe Street; refer to Figure 3-2, Vicinity Map.
Local access to the site is provided from Avenue 58.
3.3 Existing Site Physical Setting
The site is located in United States Geological Survey (USGS) Indio, California Quadrangle 7.5-minute
series topographic Range 7E and Township 6S, Section 27, Latitude 33-37-33, Longitude 116-14-03.
The site topography is relatively flat and level with a general slope to the north with drainage by
sheet flow at approximately one to two (1%-2%) percent across the site. The elevation of the site
is approximately 60 feet above mean sea level.
No settling ponds, lagoons, surface impoundments, wetlands, or natural catch basins were observed
at the subject property during this assessment.
Based on information obtained from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey online database, the subject property is
mapped as Indio fine sandy loam, wet. This series consists of very fine sandy loam and is considered
to be moderately well -drained with a moderately high to high permeability rate, and a high available
water storage capacity.
According to Community Panel Number 06065C2263H, dated April 19, 2017, the subject property
appears to be located in Zone X (unshaded), an area located outside of the 100-year and 500-year
flood plains.
3.4 Existing Land Use Setting
The subject property is currently vacant land with remnants of a former date palm orchard. No
operations are currently performed onsite. According to available historical sources, the property was
formerly undeveloped as early as 1904. A residence occupied the northeastern portion of the subject
property from circa 1928 until it was demolished in 2015. The remainder of the subject property was
developed with a date palm orchard from at least 1949 until circa 2002. Remnants of the date palm
orchard remain on the subject property. Tenants on the subject property have included residential and
farming occupants. The existing conditions on the project site are shown in Figure 3-3a, Site
Photograph Locations, and Figure 3-3b, Existing Site Photographs.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 3-1
Project Description
�
in di an
40
C11y Al
Ar
Mi rage
Palm
Indian
�jndevenfer Flat Sants Rosa
.^*o� '
rn
IF MA TINEI C
1-11 di an
Pf cow
-
San Pi
Valay
.07
EI
Source: sonand osss September 2021.
approximate Project Location
L4V|LLETTAATAVE NUES8PRCUECT
|nitia|5tudy/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Regional [OC@tjOO
�N��N3[nvimnmenm| Figure 3'1
AIJ,[} alUCWI.-_
NF' ^.yam
N
`6
O
c i2p)
i
00 N 4-1
LL.
U-)
w .
> U_
W O0
z
Q
Q v
Q
F-
LU
J
% T
g
c
`' r� •,ter -
•
k.
i
L
a -I �
N
_
o co
N
v
'o
d v
=
'
m
0
GJ
m
C
0
va
o
G.
o °
N
V
Ik
�m�
t ary c N
O C
J-- Fri, O rO
y a- N V
00
w v J
qA
■ — — — Q v O
LLJ
J a
• I �cn
-t*
i
0
�•~
bA U
aj
d v
f
� �
� X
W O
a w
r
0 Q
■�
N
i
View No. 1
View No. 2
View No. 3
View No. 4
View No. 5
View No. 6
LA VI LLETTA AT AVEN U E 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Existing Site Photographs
VCS Environmental
Figure 3-3b
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The project site is situated within an urbanized setting and is surrounded by a residential golf course
community to the west, undeveloped land to the east, and undeveloped land to the south. The City of
La Quinta General Plan designates the project site Low Density Residential; refer to Figure 3-4, Existing
and Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations. The Zoning Map designates the site as Residential
Low Density; refer to Figure 3-5, Existing and Proposed Zoning. Table 3-1, Surrounding Land Uses,
shows existing land uses, and existing General Plan and Zoning designations surrounding the project
site.
Table 3-1
Surrounding Land Uses
Direction
General Plan Designation
Existing LandAMA
North
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Single -Family Residential Across Avenue 58
East
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Date Palm Groves
South
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Vacant Land
West
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Single -Family Residential
3.5 Project Characteristics
The proposed project involves a request for approval of a General Plan Amendment, a Zone Change, a
Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development, and approval of a Tentative Tract Map to
allow for the development of 80 single-family homes, a recreation area, open space lot and retention
basin/open space on approximately 4.8 net acres. The project would have an overall density of 9.0
dwelling units per acre.
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
As shown in Figure 3-4, the proposed project is requesting to redesignate the existing General Plan
Land Use Designation on the 4.8 net acre project site from Low Density Residential up to 4 dwelling
units per acre to Medium -High Density up to 16.0 dwelling units per acre. Under the Medium/High
Density designation, a broad range of residential land uses are permitted, including small lot
subdivisions, duplex, condominium, and apartment projects.
ZONE CHANGE
As shown in Figure 3-5, the proposed project is requesting to rezone the 4.8 net acre project site from
Low Density to Medium -High Density. The Medium -High Density category provides for the
development and preservation of medium density neighborhoods from 8.0 to 12.0 units per acre.
The Medium -High Density allows a range of residential uses including single-family detached
dwellings on medium and small size lots, projects with clustered smaller dwellings, such as one
and two-story single-family attached, townhome or multi -family dwellings, with open space.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 3-6 Project Description
rW
v I
C6
Cd C
J �
C------ a
1
1 �
' 3 �
z ��
U o �
�d w Qj¢ ❑
Z �
w
a
J 2!
W w
Ln W
o LU
W
CL
L
►iJ
LI'1
J
-----------
TO
O
z _0
u 0
N tD i-
' w
a Q ❑
a 0
cn
J J
Q
LU
W
F- c N
U O C:
w
0
d U M
00 N C
Un 0 t]A
w j 'N
Z
w a0 ❑
v
Q z N
Q v D
w ro
J
C
g (-a
L
E
a�
a)
(7
N
0
Q
0
L.
CB
N
X
LU
M
'C
C
OJ
O
N
V
U O
W F �_
Q E
O
a u00
N
v
w v
� N
,>
z m O
a z CL
O
a v a
UUO
c
J
J �
Q � r�
J r
v) N
W
c
'C
C
aj
C
O
W
M
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) is to allow flexibility in the design of residential
projects, and encourage the development of creative, high -quality residential projects that provide
attractive living environments in a setting that is different from standard single-family home
development. Atypical plan view of the proposed cluster development is shown in Figure 3-6, Typicpl
Cluster. The project consists of 30% common open space (recreation area, open space lot and
retention basin/open space) and is proposing a recreation area with four open space amenities
including a recreation building, bocce ball area, swimming pool and tot lot.
PUDs require approval of a conditional use permit. The maximum density allowed in a PUD shall not
exceed the general plan and zoning designation on the property. A PUD must provide thirty percent
(30%) of the net project area (not including city street dedications, interior streets, or parking areas),
as common area. The common area cannot include parking lot landscape areas, landscaped areas of
less than five (5) feet in width, or any open space area provided for the exclusive use of a residential
unit. Common areas can include passive and active areas and must provide amenities for the
community as a whole. In order to encourage creative design development standards in PUDs, they
can be proposed by the applicant. The applicant must demonstrate in the project's design guidelines
that reduced setbacks are offset with project amenities. PUDs from 51 dwelling units to 100 units,
such as the proposed project, would be required to provide four open space amenities. The project
consists of 30% common open space and is proposing four open space amenities including a
recreation building, bocce ball area, swimming pool and tot lot. Table 3-2, Project Open SpoceAreos,
provides a breakdown of the open space areas for the project site.
Table 3-2
Project Open Space Areas
Project Area
Size
Recreation Area
29,210 square feet
Open Space Lot
6,600 square feet
Retention Basin/Open Space
26,200 square feet
LIVID along Avenue 58
4,540 square feet
Project Total
66,550 square feet
Required 30% based on Net 4.8 acres
62,655 square feet (1.44 acres)
Public Review Draft I June 2023 3-9 Project Description
PLAN 3
5 BEDROOM,
3 BATH
2, 140 5Q. FT
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
PLAN 2
3 BEDROOM,
2.5 BATH
1 ,81 5 5Q. FT.
1 s01-o'
PLAN 2
3 BEDROOM,
2.5 BATH
1,815 5Q. FT.
PLAN 3
5 BEDROOM,
3 BATH
2, 1 40 5Q. FT.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Typical Cluster
VCS Environmental Figure 3-6
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
Tentative subdivision maps provide a means for obtaining review and approval of proposed land
divisions. A tentative tract map shall be required for all subdivisions, reconfiguration, and
consolidation of real property for which a final map, parcel map or waiver of parcel map is required.
The project proposes the development of 80 single-family lot dwelling units on approximately 4.8 net
acres. The project would have an overall density of 9.0 dwelling units per acre. The proposed lot sizes
for the project would range from 2,310 square feet to 4,623 square feet with an average lot size of
2,623 square feet. As shown in Figure 3-7, Tentative Tract Map 37950, the residential units would be
oriented around a series of courtyards. Table 3-3, Land Use Statistical Summary, shows the land use
statistics of the project.
Table 3-3
Land Use Statistical Summary
Total Lots
80 Residential Lots on 4.4 Acres
Minimum Lot Size
2,310 square feet
Maximum Lot Size
4,623 square feet
Average Lot Size
2,623 square feet
Open Space/Water Quality Basin
1.65 acres
Onsite Private Streets
2.7 acres
Public Streets
0.8 acres
Gross Area
9.7 acres
Net Area
4.8 acres
The minimum lot size would be 2,310 square feet. The lots would average approximately 2,623 square
feet in size. The cluster layout of the homes would be designed to achieve visual diversity and interest
on the street scene through varying setbacks, articulated building masses and enhanced elevations.
The project would consist of mainly two-story homes, along with three one story plans along Avenue
58. Additionally, the community may consist of a mix of two -bedroom units and three -bedroom units
ranging in size from approximately 1,250 square feet to 1,692 square feet. Each residential unit would
be provided with a private outdoor patio as well as an attached garage.
A total of 30% of the project would consist of open space, including a 29,210 square foot amenity
center and tot lot located at the entrance to the community along with a landscaped area along the
site frontage, with a 6,000 square foot open space active lot, as well as a 26,200 square foot multi -use
basin/open space area which may be used as an active area for residents most of the year that might
include sittings areas, picnic tables, movable soccer nets, etc. The open space amenities would be
maintained by a Homeowner's Association.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 3-11 Project Description
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
ARCHITECTURE
The proposed project has been designed to be visually compatible with similar architectural elements
that are common in La Quinta. The overall project's architecture reflects a combination of Spanish
Mediterranean and Santa Barbara design theme; refer to Figure 3-8, Building Design and
Characteristics.
Key design Spanish architectural design elements include use of courtyards, tile rooftops, and smooth
stucco walls, arched doors, entryways, and windows, as well as heavy wooden doors with carving and
metal work (Figures 3-9a to 3-9c, Spanish Elevations).
Key design Mediterranean architectural design elements include emphasis on indoor/outdoor living,
maximizing natural light and views of the outdoors, arched windows and doors and interior arched
casings, and the use of natural materials in finishes and decor such as wood, rattan, tile, ceramics,
terracotta, and wrought iron. (Figures 3-10a to 3-10c, Mediterranean Elevations).
Key design Santa Barbara architectural design elements are an architectural design style derived
from Mediterranean and Spanish -revival architecture often characterized by deep red tones and
polished wood textures that contrast with stark white walls. Santa Barbara style architecture and
interior design are characterized by white stucco walls, exposed beam ceilings, red -tile roofs and
floors, arcades, and courtyards (Figures 3-11a to 3-11c, Santa Barbara Elevations).
As shown in Figure 3-12a, Color Schemes, three different color design themes are proposed to add
variety and visual interest. Samples of building elements for the project are shown in Figures 3-12b to
3-12d, Color Boards.
The proposed recreation building would be a 2,772 square foot area with a maximum height of 14 feet
11 inches and would include a preparation kitchen, great room, restrooms and covered patio. The
architecture would complement the design themes reflected in the residential architecture. Elevation
and floor plan views of the proposed recreation building are shown in Figure 3-13a, Recreation Center
Elevation, and Figure 3-13b, Recreation Center Floor Plan.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
The project proposes a comprehensive landscape plan within the project site and along the frontage
of the property. A total of 66,550 square feet of area will consist of hard and softscape materials. An
additional 26,200 square feet of area in the detention basin will consist of ground cover. The landscape
treatment for the project is intended to complement the Coachella Valley desert environment; refer
to Figures 3-14, Conceptual Landscape Plan. Consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, the
project proposes image corridor enhancements along Avenue 58. A total of 4,540 square feet of
landscaping is proposed on the Avenue 58 landscape corridor along the frontage of the project site.
The landscape area includes a combination of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. A meandering
multimodal trail is proposed within the landscape to enhance pedestrian circulation. The landscape
along the frontage creates aesthetically pleasing views for motorists and pedestrians and creates an
entry statement for the project.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 3-12 Project Description
AIRPORT BLVD
PROJECT
SITE
0
58TH AVENUE
SOTH AVE
COTT AVENUE
rc
0
61TH AVENUE
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 37950
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, OF SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN
APN 764-01-012 (TTM 30092)
B ZONING/GENERAL PLAN: RL/LDR
-- - -- EXISTING USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
-- -- -- --
WATER POINT -- ..:' .: Q� ._:,. --
v, / -
� EX. 18" WA Dr OMNECTION
(-,
AVrNUE 58- -� T� EX. 1B..WA
\ ' EX. 18'SS SEWER POINT -
IL OF CONNECTION N89' 32. 26.07"W J EX. 18"SS
6:4
- EX. W SS b / -
/ l n 700=-:7_
LOT A OFFER FOR DEDICATION F R -EX. 33"SS
3 A -
\b I_ M Z PUBLIC STREET IMPROIMENTS
_ 33,040 SF
o
VICINITY MAP
61•
6,600 SF •,• ACCESS FOR FIRE•.•.
N.T.s
REATION BUILDING
CALL �P
11
`�`
••••� •••••••••••••••••••
" "' "_"
p 0`^ DEPARTMENT ONLY -
" Q' o."�E"" "'; "•"'
LOT E
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
,
LOT C
6 -
; 64'
-
ASIN SF
966x
PARCEL 1:
, 29, 210 SF
~V-
P
J)/
B27
RETENTION BASIN / OPEN SPACE
ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, OF
SECTION 2], TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE ]EAST. SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN,
ASSHOWN BY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
611
/ COMMON AREA
PAD=-60.0
i
a l
2�-
'
�a
o 7e
R 3 J1,
PAD$-60., \�
79 o
4004 650E o 4g83 SF
q=- ,5 Iln PA -A.'
P EXISTING LOT I I
ACCESS RAMP, 20% MAX SLOPE
MAX. WATER LEVEL
1OD-YR STORM
BEGINNING ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTH EAST QUARTER, AT A POINT 641.E FEET ( ®� G LINE /
WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF. THENCE AT A RIGHT ANGLE SOUTHERLY B�a 60.0• 60.0' IIII
L l
60.0'
FEET; THENCE AT A RIGHT ANGLE WESTERLY, 324 FEET; THENCE AT A RIGHT ANGLE ®
NORTHERLY, 651 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER; y
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER, 324 FEET TO �61 w w:045x-3" wn PRIVAT STRsx D wp p " « 4wA 0.45x w" Ra o0
THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TO -ss-ss ds99 • 0 A
GT
APN: 764-180.002-2 PAD=-60.2 s 117,470 SF
80D - 2.0'
PARCEL 2: r fi0 PRIVATE
ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF Ra7,zn _ �� p6405F 26405E �� STREETS
SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN v p=-59 8 PqD=-59.3-62.0'_
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN BY ••••• •••••••••••••••• o m n 0 76 nzs.0'-ss.0'J 25.0'73
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: OPEN SP. ACE'.' ' ' ' ' • ' o A 59 5F n A2480 IF - _ n 22p83 SF o t
I) PAO--60.4 ......... "'P D- 60.4 P D- l-, 55.0' "
BE GINNING ON A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID \ -, �J2 P D- 60.3
SECTION 517.60 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER \ 40.0' 40.0• m 23TSSF 2310 5F q J
OF SECTION 27; THENCE AT A RIGHT ANGLE SOUTHERLY 651.00 FEET; THENCE AT A RIGHT •420'• to _ ' PAD=-fi0.0 I P/�D--59.5 0
ANGLE WESTERLY 324.00 FEET; THENCE AT A RIGHT ANGLE NORTHERLY 651.00 FEET TOA, 2 6--� - > n L_ W "n
NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE EASTERLY 2772 5F 0�% ��-55.0'/ 55.0'- f�� - 0g5R u b
ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE 324.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 0- s9 \ (j M 6Lfia an n - 6'- 4
59.0 - 25.0' 2604 SF "' r�ZR
APN: ]64-180.003-3 PAD 60 2 O 4 S 40. 70 - 69 42.0' w 'u 24603 IF "' 2480 SF
0' qq
a �0-a6 .� 0 2310 SF e 2310 SF o ,o,Sp ^'PAD 5990 P D 59.7i
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: M + a e PAD=-60.0 P<0=-59.5 o N
OF o 64 65 -55.0' 55.0- '
764-1860D2 J m 0 < I �s n '"_PAD �-. 41 jPAD8050.21 25.0' _ � a-F 25.0' - PAD045IF
97i0 40.0' 40.0' '
764180.003 z M 59.0'- 0,45R �66 67 045R- n
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS oo�� b' '-,e`er - L J L_ J a / 264D 5F �D 5F,_63,- _ J a � w w,
= 40C' I 40.0' � -PA 80.0'9.8 J n L PAD-O.O,-3-
EXISTING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL �� a2.a' ` I , --= -- - 420• 40 q0.0' a0.0'(•fi
PROPOSED: MEDIUM/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(4-16 UNITS/AC) o soo 20' "20'
ZONING: maLL 59.0'- 25.0' PA6 -60.2� 0'O u 2480 SF 805E 250' PAD--5550'_ I `55.00_�59.9 25.0'n 59 37
K o D- 2604 SF : (e ; o A08055F 0
/ 6 20' 20" P 0- 59.6Q iPAD=-603iO o PA-59.7
EXISTING: IF
RL -J P
PROPOSED: RMH wz n 2p'259.a t2' t2' PAD 59.ai A -- o 56 A q-1
OWNER/DEVELOPER <�w L - - ;20' D.0' 4p,0' 2 D 5 I 4D.D' I --
RODEO PAO=-594 0= 0
RODEO CREDIT ENTERPRISES, LEO - ' °' _
��9 "' °SJ `L'6`1
9595 WILSHIRE BLVO, SUITE 708 �� o O.SiR- -SS.o• 50- - 045R3
2772 IF
-�
o z n L- ATTN KRIS
HILLS, CA 90212 _ PAp=-59.3
59.0'- 25.0' 'r'26F q f 6 I ATTN: KRIS PINERO a0.0' 40.0' \ o\ 55 f a2.0' 248065E 3a
SIF
(818)981-3000 w nPAD=-59.7 iD " PAD 05� I P>.,1� IF ' ,PAD=- - PAp8060.2c
CIVIL ENGINEER 10 _ A.
P 1
2478 0, 42.0' ,Q '" 0 00 / o -s5.0' '5.0
D & D ENGINEERING, INC PAD=-59.5 r ao S 54 o a 40.0' a0.0'
119 W HVDE PARK BLVD �- 4 PAO--59.81 iPAD=-59.6 . 25 0 25'0' 2604 SF e FS2o��
/eM1 59.0'- 0I5X o 0 .PAD=-60.3i
INGLEWOOQCA90302 6' L I n 26ao 5F o 2640 SF
ATTN: HENRIK NAZARIAN D e " n ^-j�_ �20.0\-20.0•_ 20.0'-P- 0.092 '2 .0' 2.0• P�_00_9 -,8.0• \22.0' 20.0• " (424)351-6800 Iz 40.0'f
LEGEND: 2476 SF APN yJ -
�p--59.5 764-18 -002" I F-1 F-1 s �. N }
/ 59.0'- a X
-- PROPERTY LINE 25.0• c 49 48 47 I 6 5 0 7 o 0 30
$ ,m„ 2320 5F m 2320 IF m 12320 SP 24 IF 203205E ai 20 1 a 2460 5F
-60 PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR 2772 SF ; ,PAD--60.7� PAD- 60.51 PAD=-6o.3I PAD %O0 E 9.9j PAD--59.9I 1PAD=-60.22
AD
PA
PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR RETAINING n-63._'-593-2,.0' y T Oa'I 1 BI 76 18N poO
-(-60) - - EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR WALL
40.0' 4 0' PA 40.0• 40.0' Y
---- EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR 13 �0.53x_ 015x 045Rn O:ddx s F -'i_s, 045R s0o q
2677 SF S - - - - El - - -
CENTERLINE v w b
LPAD--60.0 j4 wa rrb6'Fb �w
REST "E" y
SS PROPOSED V.C.P SEWER MAIN 63.0'- o a0.0' -0' a00' ♦0.0'V a
_ _ 4D. D' 4D.D' 40.0'- 40.0' 4 .p' 4D.D' T 40. p' -aD.D' ��
e PROPOSED SEWER MANHOLES o
PROPOSED WATER MAIN 4 t5 I. ,6 0. t7 0. ,s o' 2 00 24 21 22 a 23 24 25 26
WA 0i 4623 SF ^ 25.0• o 0 o n
SD PROPOSED STORM DRAIN h PAD--59.8 - 2400 SF o 2400 SF ,° 2400 SIF ,° 2400 IF ,° 4 SIF o 00 SF 2400 SF o 2400 SF J�- 2400 SF o 2400 SF o 2400 SF o 2400 SFo PAp- 60.2" PAO- 60.4 PAp- 60.7 q=-.PqD=-60.5iO PqD=-60.3 P-60.1� PAD=-PAD--601b PAD--60.J�-60.1� �- SJ.90
EXISTING SEWER MAIN TO BE BA`DONED 3 -m J J J J J o
- - EXISTING WATER MAIN - 40.0' 40.0' I.D. 40.0' ..0' 40.0'546.00 40.0' 40C' 40.0' 40.0' 40.0' 40.0' 161
EASEMENT LINE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: PROP
APN 764-190-002
41
IF
PAD40593 J
i.0
55,07 40
2310 SF
PAD=-59.5
55.0'
' 39
310 SF
PAP- J5
AD--59.5
38 \
SF
PAD-AD=-59_3 J
--60.0'-
640 S
PAD=-59.8 J
0'
0'
02 11
1
' PA==ED
-60.0
PA=0�6 n I
-55C
0
0 IF
- J
55.0'-1
28
500 IF
- J
27
3302DO 5F e
--J
RIGHT OF WAY EXISTING: VACANT LAND RETANING" / ZONING/GENERAL PLAN: RL/LDR APN 764-190-003
WALL
PROPOSED: 80 RESIDENTIAL LOTS D fibEXISTNG USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING/GENERAL PLAN: RL/LDR
- - BUILDING SETBACK AVERAGE LOT SIZE: 2,6235E / EXISTING USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
BACK OF WALK MINIMUM LOT SIZE: 2,3105E / `b
CROSS GUTTER
BEEREATIONAREA:
OPEN SPACE:
ILOT
ILOT
LITIES AND SERVICES•
EXISTING EASEMENTS•
2528
w
PROPOSED FINISH SURFACE ELEVATION
RETENTION BASIN/OPEN SPACE:
1 LOT
ELECTRIC:
GAS:
IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SOCAL GAS
O AN EASEMENT FOR ROADS, PIPELINES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED
JUNE 6, 1957 AS BOOK 2099, PAGE 3040F OFFICIAL RECORDS. IN FAVOR OF:
GROSS AREA:
6.94 AC./389.500 BE
TELEPHONE:
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS
RUELLA S.SCHAFER
0.4E
PROPOSED SURFACE SLOPE
NETAREA:
4]9 AC./208,850 SF
CABLE TV:
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS
REQUIRED OPEN SPACE (30%):
1A4 AC. /62,655 SF
4 AN EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC ROAD AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED IN BOOK
PROPOSED A.C. PAVEMENT
ONSITE STREETS:
2.10 AC.
WATER:
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
2454, PAGE 85 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. IN FAVOR OF: THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
CE•'�
PROPOSED CONCRETE
PUBLIC STREETS:
O.76 AC.
SEWER:
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
(THE LOCATION OF THE EASEMENT CANNOT BE DETERMINED FROM THE RECORD
COMMON AREA PLAN
INFORMATION.)
0
PROPOSED LANDSCAPE
RECREATION AREA:
0.67 AC./ 29,210 SF
SCHOOL DISTRICT:
COACHELLA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
-6-
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION
OPEN SPACE LOT: 0.15 AC./6,600 SF
RETENTION BASIN/OPEN SPACE: 0.63AC./27,370 SF
WASTE DISPOSAL:
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF THE DESERT
O ANEASEMENTFOR POWER LINES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES, RECORDED MARCH
28,1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO.89-094143 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. IN FAVOR OF:
TOTAL OPEN SPACE AREA=
1.45 AC BE SE(30.2%)�
44 AC.
IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT(AFFECTS THE SOUTH 60.0 FEET OF THE NORTH
PROPOSED 6' PERIMETER WALL
90.0 FEET AS SHOWN)
Source: D&D Engineering, Inc.; February 28, 2023.
Lit:
0�
0
0
0
0
0�
0
IIIIIi�IIII'
��
0
0
N
RESIDENCE q,5' PROPOSED PRIVATE DRIVE q 5• RESIDENCE
IOEW K AND FIRE LANE SIDEWALK,
3.5' GE 3.5'
LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE
GARAGE L GARAGE
STREET SECTION A -A
PROPOSED PRIVATE DRIVE AND FIRE LANE
NO SCALE
NORTH SOUTH
/W
W
STREET SECTION B-B
AVENUE 58
NO SCALE
LOT
LINE /
RETAINING
WALL
1'
RESIDENCE
LOT 11
BACKYARD
PAD EL = -59.9
ADJACENT PARCEL
APN: 764-180-001
FG EL = (-62.1) 1RjgwV
SECTION C-C
WEST BOUNDARY
NO SCALE
LOT
PROPOSED LINE
RETAINING
WALL
I'
RESIDENCE
LOT 17
BACKYARD
ADJACENT PARCEL
APN: 764-190-002
ii PAD EL
i_ 607 lii FGEL=-62.5
'GRADES & ELEVATION NOTE
GRADES AND ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON MAP ARE NOT
} E APPROVED UNTIL FINAL MAP
PROP 'FIRE HYDRANT NOTE
RETAINING KEEP 2' CLEARANCE FROM OBSTRUCTIONS AROUND
HYDRANTS
EARTHWORK QUANTITY:
2,215 C.Y. CUT
24,906 C.V. FILL
23,000 C.V. IMPORT
SECTION D-D
SOUTH BOUNDARY
NO SCALE
LOT
LINE
PROPOSED
RETAINING
WALL
V
LOT 31
BACKYARD
PAD EL = -60.0
ADJACENT PARCEL
- APN: 764-180-004
- - FG EL = -63.3
SECTION E-E
EAST BOUNDARY
NO SCALE
40 0 40 80
scale 1"= 40• feet
CITY OF LA QUINTA
1" = 40'
TTM 37950 DA1L:
2/28/2023
SH7 NO:
01 OF 01
LA VI LLETTA AT AVEN U E 58 P ROJ ECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Tentative Tract Map 37950
VCS Environmental
Figure 3-7
Typical Characteristics:
• Rectangular or asymmetrical massing with some recessed second floor elements
• Breaks in massing
• Concrete tile roof materials
• ❑istinctive trim over entry
• Wrought Iron window treatment
• Shutters Qz
• Pot shelves~ _
• Decorative gable end tiles
:i;dl.11l .
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
ED
Building Architecture and Form:
1, Articulate buildingfacades by including
1) Provide one story elements.(porch, living
variation in massing, roof form, and wall
area, garages where applicable) an some
planes.
of the floor plans to allow more variations.
2) Homes with same facades shall be
separated by a minimum of one lot when
occurring along the same side of the
street, and offset homes of same facades
when occurring on the opposite side of
the street by at least one lot.
3) Articulate all elevations within public view
especially on corner homes and the rear
elevations of street adjacent homes.
4) Vary roof lines through the use of gables
and other roof elements consistent with
the architectural style. Change the height
and direction of roof ridges to provide
variations.
5) Corner lot houses shall address the
corner. These shall be designed to be
more open and landscaped.
2. Use multiple colors, materials, textures, and
The community includes 4 floor plans and 3
applied finishes to help break up wall
elevation styles overall. Each plan includes a
massing.
minimum of 2 elevation styles, and 3 cc4or
schemes for each of the 3 styles. Between the
variety of floor plans in conjunction with
elevation styles each and varying color
choices, the community w111 Include a total of
27 unique homes.
3. Provide distinctive entries, porches, balconies
1) All houses shall have an entry feature
and window treatment, oriented toward the
which can be achieved through an
street,
architectural element, stepping up the
entry way, wrought iron or stucco
columns, or a distinctive parch over entry.
2) Provide window treatment on all side
windows for corner homes and at the rear
windows of street adjacent homes
consistent With the architectural style.
Examples include:
• Window trim and shutters.
• Shaped frames and sills to enhance
openings and add additional relief.
4. Residential buildings shall use high-
Meet or exceed City Standard.
quality, tile roofing (concrete, ceramic,
etc.), appropriate for withstanding the
City's varied climate conditions.
5. Garage doors shall provide aesthetic
Meet or exceed the City Standard.
value to the home.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Buillding Design and Characteristics
1 VCS Environmental Figure 3-8
rl 0*
t
i 2022 K"n I. Crook Aro Aed. M. Reler to Iondows draMnx fm wail. rcee. ord snub io ibm
FRONT RIGHTMATERIALS LEGEND
FRONT DOOR: FIBERGLASS
GARAGE DOOR: METALSECi mi
RCOR CONCREFE'5'TILE
FASCIA: 2,,3 WOOD
BARGE. 21AWOW
GABLE END: SIMULATED CLAY RE
WAIL! STUCCO
W,NDOwS' VINYL WI GRIDS
SHiUMIM. SIMUI-AT® WOOD
F SHELF TUBUI-AR WEEL
WIhl STUCCO OVER RrM ROAM
Erl
qq �
i'
9
--
REAR COLOR SCHEME 1 I -Fr
PLAN I
SPANISH ELEVATIONS o z
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Spanish Elevations
1 VCS Environmental Figure 3-9a
a
I
FRONT (MOTOR COURT VIEW) MATERIALS LEGEND RIGHT
PROM DOOR: FIBERGLASS
GARAGE DOOR: MEFALSEGTIO"
ROOF: CONCREFE'S']ILE
FASCIA; WWOOD
BARGE; 2,4W000
GABLE ENO; SMULATEDCLAYTILE
MALL; STucca
WINDOW$; VINYL WiGR@S
"LF"ER5. NM1 I-ATm WR]OFl
PQT SHELF TIIBIILARSTELL
TRIM STUCCO OVER RICAD FOAM
1.4
bL
REAR COLORSCHEME2 LEFT
PLAN 2A
SPANISH ELEVATIONS c P� 2
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Spanish Elevations
13 VCS Environmental Figure 3-9b
�
d
g
�
ƒ
\
\>
&
m
� 2 >
-a/\
7. ƒ m
� m / z
m m
e
CU/-0
a \
k 0 \
� = H
_
� `
; f
}
|
§
�
\
3
k
_
0
-
/
0
\
n
/
9
z
m
v
.
2
|
\
>
.,
�
|
E
® r-
rxm
}\
0
|«
m#-
r 7
)
/ »
(
/
k`)
M70
§
2
�
`
>
Lou/
m--------
§
\
�
�
�
d
9
w
w
s
R
%
& y
� � R
� g \
�/\
m
m < \m m
e
a)/-0
a 0
k 0 \
� = H
�
d
g
�
cr
/
\>
>
& <
m
g \
/ \
m
7 \m m
e
�/-0
a \
k 0 \
= H
§
.
�
@
.I�`
\
3
�
\
/
.
§
ƒ
�
>
n
/
/
m
v
2
..
i
!
Lim
)
\
�
{ /
§
m x
\
;
(
z
§§§)j§\�/§
§
/
§
; §; BG§
§
<
>
§
§
z
§
2
0
/
\
\
�
�
d
g
eD
�
s
R
%
& y
� � R
g \
/ \
m
m < \m m
e
�/-0
a \
k 0 \
VI = H
x�
A°-
;
\
3
ƒ
§ .
| �
, t
m
\
/
§
PJ
mx\
�))j§\�/§ \
@
§
; HM
§;
/
>
§
§
z
.
�
------:
/
\
:
3
�
FRONT (MOTOR COURT VIEW) MATERIALS LEGEND RIGHT
PROM DOOR: FIBEeGLOM
GARAGE DOOR: MEFALSECTO"
ROOF: CONCIRMT1ILE
FASCIA; ys Wppp
"`R Z WOOD
GAELE END! DECORATE FOAM
WAlI: STIIPCG.
WWOOWS: VINRW/GRIM
WINDOW BO%: SIMIILArM WOOD
511 n ' . �Muurm woov
POT s� roAnn
min sruccoovEeRIGID FOAM
r
■
REAR COLOR SCHEME 5 LEFT
PLAN 213
SANTA BARBARA ELEVATIONS D 12
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Santa Barbara Elevations
13 VCS Environmental Figure 3-11 a
� � 1
K
.,e 2o22 ron L. Cm AdcN16rd. W Re9., fo lond . d o+ mfor w I. Fr¢e, ¢�tl slFunioco�bre
FRONT MATERIALS LEGEND RIGHT
M-1 ATE
BROW DOOR: FIBEeGLM1M
GARAGE DOOR: MEFALSECTO"
ROOF: CONCGEETI]LE
FASCIA; ys Wppp
"`R 9 WOOD
GAELE END! DECORATE FOAM
WAlI: STIIPCG.
WWOOWS: VINRW/GRIM
WINDOW BO%: SMIILArM WOOD
511uITERS' . �MuuTfn woov
POT 5r roAnn
mlh STUCCO 0YE4 RIGID FOAM
Ir
�a
R
I
00
REAR COLORSCHEME4 LEFT
PLAN 1 B
SANTA BARBARA ELEVATIONS o a
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Santa Barbara Elevations
13 VCS Environmental Figure 3-11 b
FRONT MATERIALS LEGEND RIGHT
FROET DOOR: FIBEeGLM1M
GARAGE DOOR: MEFALSECTO"
ROOF: CONCGEETI]LE
FASCIA; ys WppD
"`R Z WOOD
GAELE END! DECORATE FOAM
WAlI: SIUOCG.
WWOOWS: VINRW/GRIM
WINDOW BO%: SIMIILArM WOOD
511 n ' . �Muurm woov
POT s� roAnn
min sruccoOVEeRIGID FOAM
REAR COLOR SCHEME 5 LEFT
PLAN 413
SANTA BARBARA ELEVATIONS D a 0 12
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Santa Barbara Elevations
13 VCS Environmental Figure 3-11 C
AVENUE 58
LA QUINTA, CA
"A" ELEVATIONS
SPANISH
SCHEME 1
SCHEME 2
SCHEME 3
STUCCO
1503
1585
1502
STUCCO PAINT MATCH'-
SW7028 INCREDIBLE WHITE
SW6386 NAPERY
SW7571 CASA BLANCA
FASCIA /
SW6047
SW6102
SW6089
GARAGE DOOR
HOT COCOA
PORTABELLO
GROUNDED
SW9173
SW9102
SW9101
TRIM
SHIITAKE
QUINOA
TRES NATURALE
FRONT DOOR I
SW6034
SW7604
SW7745
SHUTTERS
ARRESTING AUBURN
SMOKY BLUE
MUDDLED BASIL
SW6061
SW6061
SW6061
GABLE DETAIL
TANBARK
TANBARK
TANBARK
SW6990
SW6990
SW6990
WROUGHT IRON
CAVIAR
CAVIAR
CAVIAR
ROOF: "S" TILE
SMC 8403
SMC 8403
SMC 8403
CAPISTRANO
SANTA BARBARA BLD
SANTA BARBARA BLD
SANTA BARBARA BLD
"B" ELEVATIONS
SANTA BARBARA
SCHEME 4
SCHEME 5
SCHEME 6
STUCCO
1572
1626
1627
STUCCO PAINT MATCH—
RGB 25512 ,_
S'VV7001 MARSHMALLOW
SW7038 TONY TAUPE
SW6074
SW2806
SW7040
FASCIA or
SPALDING GRAY
RKWD BROWN
SMOKEHOUSE
SW7634
SW6665
SW7512
TRIM
PEDIMENT
GARDENIA
PAVILION BEIGE
GARAGE DOOR /
SW6075
SW2808
SW7041
FRONT DOOR
GARRET GRAY
RKWD DARK BROWN
VAN DYKE BROWN
SW9125
SW6214
SW2846
SHUTTERS
OLIVIA OSCURO
UNDERSEAS
RYCRT BRNZ GREEN
ROOF: "S" TILE
3773
3773
3773
CAPISTRANO
WALNUT CREEK
WALNUT CREEK
WALNUT CREEK
"C" ELEVATIONS
MEDITERRANEAN
SCHEME7
SCHEME8
SCHEME9
STUCCO
27
1553
1551
STUCCO PAINT MATCH'-
SW6120 BELIEVABLE BUFF
SW7506 LOGGIA
SW7521 DORMER BROWN
SW7033
SW7514
SW9090
FASCIA/TRIM
BRAINSTORM BRONZE
FOOTHILLS
CARAIBE
GARAGE DOOR /
SW7032
SW6075
SW9091
FRONT DOOR /
WARM STONE
GARRET GRAY
HALF CAFF
SHUTTERS
ROOF: "S" TILE
SCC8806
SCC8806
SCC8806
CAPISTRANO
TUCSON BLEND
TUCSON BLEND
TUCSON BLEND
STUCCO: OMEGA
PAINT: SHERWIN
WILLIAMS
ROOF: EAGLE
ALL FLASHING, GUTTERS, DOWNSPOUTS ETC. TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACE. ALL PAINT BREAKS TO BE CUT AT INSIDE CORNERS.
" FOR PHOTOSHOP & RENDERING PURPOSES ONLY, DO NOT USE IN THE FIELD
TODAS LAS TAPAJUNTAS, CAnALERAS, CAMALONES, ETC.SERAN PINTADOS PARA IGUALAR A LA SUPERFICIE DE JUNTO
TODAS LAS RESTAURAS DE PINTURA BE CORTARAN EN LAS ESQUINAS INTERIORES
"SOLO PARA FINES DE PHOTOSHOP Y REPRESENTACIONES, NO USAR EN EL CAMPO
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Color Schemes
VCS Environmental Figure 3-12a
SPANISH
SCHEME #1
o;
o
�o £ k OW o
LLw
a o"
Q ¢ O
p LL 3
a
ROYAL INVESTORS GROUP AVENUE 58 Kavll
LA QUINTA, CA nmi<
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
13 1 VCS Environmental
SPANISH
SCHEME #2
wr
u°io ~ OW ~ p
ok
LLw
." "
a .0 'o
a
ROYAL INVESTORS GROUP AVENUE 58 KNMI
LA QUINTA, CA rwvz my .... -...............
SPANISH
SCHEME #3
°o
aQ
LLw
F ow F °
ok -
z" "
a
o 'o
a
ROYAL INVESTORS GROUP
AVENUE 58 K"M L.
LA QUINTA, CA wnvzxox:
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Color Boards — Spanish
Figure 3-12b
MEDITERRANEAN
SCHEME#7
0
°G°Gk
a
u ao�
LL
aLL
Grook
ROYAL iNVEsroas caouP AVENUE 58 Kevin L�p �nvwun
LA OUINTA, CA nnvaxmx
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
13 1 VCS Environmental
MEDITERRANEAN
SCHEME #8
00�
a
u Qow
LL
a�
u Kavi� L Gro.�
ROYAL INVESTORS GROUP AVENUE 58 FKIJaq I
LA QUINTA, CA uxzmn
MEDITERRANEAN
SCHEME#9
O
O
0
£_ 10101-
°°G
GG
a
u a0
LL aLL
AVENUE 58
K�"Mc. CI-1I
ROYAL INVESTORS GROUP
LA OUINTA, CA wnvzxox:
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Color Boards — Mediterranean
Figure 3-12c
SANTA BARBARA
SCHEME #4
0
a
I
ROYAL iNVEsroas caouP AVENUE 58 Kevin L Cr .�p mc�wucLl
LA OUINTA, CA nn.....
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
13 1 VCS Environmental
SANTA BARBARA
SCHEME #5
0
°°
E
LL ~ °o°o G
.o
as
a�`
RovAL INVESTORS GROUP AVENUE 58 Ka LC ten* OUP
LA QUINTA, CA uxz%' r
SANTA BARBARA
SCHEME #6
4u•
a f .0
N -
LL $°° G
00
are
°
ROYAL INVESTORS GROUP AVENUE 58 K°""L.. Cr-I,l
LA OUINTA, CA wnvzxox:
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Color Boards —Santa Barbara
Figure 3-12d
F-Ew
IE)MI]K bLC—k ArdiW.?. Iz. i.W hf IrrdYm�AvrAng�lorwd,hw, andrleub 1xaG
FRONT
LEFT RIGHT
� .FIUI.
QP.
f
REAR
RECREATION CENTER 9
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Recreation Center Elevation
13 VCS Environmental Figure 3-13a
L{ i I
----LI i J L_—L ---- t
PLUMBING
FIXTURES REQUIRED
oCCUPANCr
GROUP
ROOM
ARE4
RATIO
OCCUPANTS
WATER
CLOSETS
LAVATORIEST
TOTAL
�
TOTAL
MALE
FEMALE
MALE
FEMALE
MALE
FEMALE
_
1/yap
I
lase=
lazs=
lolsk
lolsa-
0000
]IRINA
1/w
IaaTOn-
10 5¢
OlW_TOTAL
REQUIREDSWIMING
11,
POOL -PLUMBING FIXTURES
REQUIRED
WATER
SURFACEAR
TOTAL
SQ.FT.
BATHERS
WATER
CLOSETS
URINALS
LAVATORIES
SHO
I�
WATER
MALE
CLOSET$
FEMALE
LAVATORIES
MALE
FEMALE
URINALS
MALE
TOTAL REQUIRED
PLUMBING FIXTURES PROVIDED
WATER CLOSETS LAVATORIES
URINALS
MEWS RESTROOM
WOMEN'S RESTROOM
Source: Kevin L. Crook Architect, Inc.; July 18, 2022.
AREATABULA110N
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA
ALLOWANCES PER OCCUPANT
CPnNIC z
GROUPANC
ROOM
AaEA
TOTAL
RATIO
�
ocCUPANrs
TOTAL
fXlrs
REOUIR®
ulrs
PROMO®
HAR LIAIE
I/Isis
I/Is
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Recreation Center Floor Plan
13 VCS Environmental Figure 3-13b
aIN
Source: VLA Group; November 18, 2022.
EN
:13 VCS Environmental
.r
V
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Conceptual Landscape Plan
Figure 3-14
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Within the community, the project proposes a combination of trees, shrubs, and ground cover.
Landscape and/or hardscape treatment is proposed along drive isles, parkways, residential courtyards,
recreation building, pool and deck area and play area. Table 3-4, Proposed Landscaping, identifies the
amount and locations of landscaping and hardscape proposed within the project.
Table 3-4
Proposed Landscaping
oc;tiorA& Landscaping Amounts
Recreation Area, Pool, Building
Recreation Building
2,733 square feet
Pool and Hardscape Area
8,310 square feet
Shrub Areas
6,000 square feet
Turf Area
2,860 square feet
Subtotal
19,903 square feet
Play Area
Shrub Areas
1,068 square feet
Turf Areas
1,432 square feet
Concrete Area
535 square feet
Subtotal
4,307 square feet
Common Areas
Shrub Areas
5,000 square feet
Subtotal
5,000 square feet
Total Project Landscaping
Total Community Landscaping
29,210 square feet
Total Open Space Lot
6,600 square feet
Total Avenue 58 Corridor Landscaping
4,540 square feet
Total Detention Basin Landscaping
26,200 square feet
Total
66,550 square feet
Source: VLA Group, Preliminary Landscape Plan, October 20, 2021.
CIRCULATION/PARKING
Access to the project would be from two entrances from Avenue 58. A 40-foot wide private loop road
with a 3.5-foot wide landscaped parkway and a 4.5-foot wide sidewalk would provide internal vehicle
and pedestrian access for the project. The pedestrian connection to Avenue 58 would be provided by
sidewalks along the driveway entrance to the project. As shown in Table 3-5, Parking Summary, a
combination of covered garage parking and surface parking would be provided.
Table 3-5
Parking Summary
IF Parking Type
Parking Spaces
Required Parking
Total Residential Units
80
Total Required Parking
205
Proposed Resident Parking
164
Guest Parking
41
Total Parking
205
Source: D&D Engineering, Inc., Tentative Tract Map No. 37950, June 17, 2001.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 3-32 Project Description
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
DRAINAGE PLAN
The project is required to prepare and have an approved Water Quality Management Plan that would
demonstrate that there would not be any offsite surface water generated by the project. The drainage
plan, in conjunction with the project Water Quality Management Plan, would retain and infiltrate all
onsite stormwater runoff. The stormwater runoff from the site would be conveyed along private drives
that would flow into a catch basin located on the site that would drain into a 26,200 square foot
drainage basin where it would infiltrate into the ground.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
Onsite utility infrastructure would be required to be constructed to serve the project. The municipal
and private utility services necessary to serve the project site are currently available along Avenue 58,
including water, sanitary sewer, and dry utilities (e.g., electricity, natural gas, cable). The utilities would
be provided to the project via underground connections from Avenue 58. No new or expanded utility
lines or facilities are required for serving the project, except as needed for the utility connections. The
final sizing and design of onsite facilities would occur during final design.
Water
Water service to the project site would be provided by the Coachella Valley Water District through an
existing 18-inch main water line along the northside of Avenue 58. An 8-inch water line would connect
to the main water pipeline along Avenue 58, and 4-inch or smaller laterals would extend through the
looped private road and drive areas to service all units.
Sewer
Sewer service to the project site would be provided by the Coachella Valley Water District through an
existing 33-inch sewer main line along Avenue 58. An 8-inch sewer pipeline would connect to the main
sewer pipeline along Avenue 58 and 4-inch to 6-inch laterals would extend through the looped private
road and drive areas to service all units.
Solid Waste Disposal
Solid waste disposal would be provided by Waste Management of the Desert. Solid waste would be
transported to Edom Hill Transfer Station and then taken to one of three landfills, Lamb Canyon,
Badlands or El Sobrante. All three landfills have long-term available capacity.
Electric, Natural Gas and Telecommunications
Electrical, natural and telecommunications providers forthe proposed project are shown in Table 3-6,
Utility Providers.
Table 3-6
Utility Providers
Provider
A Utility
Imperial Irrigation District
Electric
Southern California Gas
Natural Gas
Telephone
Frontier Communications I Verizon
Charter Cable I Frontier Cable I Spectrum
Cable and Internet
Public Review Draft I June 2023
3-33
Project Description
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PUBLIC SERVICES
Fire Protection Service
The Riverside County Fire Department would provide fire protection service for the project. The
Department provides staffing from three paramedic and engine companies. The closest fire station
would be Fire Station 70 located at 54001 Madison Street, approximately 1.4 miles from the project
site. The fire station includes primary and reserve fire engines and a volunteer squad vehicle.
Police Protection Service
The Riverside Sheriff's Department would provide law enforcement protection service for the project.
The Sheriff's Department provides 24-7 law enforcement protection for the City and surrounding
sphere of influence. There are two Sheriff Department offices in the City of La Quinta, located at 51-
351 Avenida Bermudas and the Business District office located at 79440 Corporate Center Drive.
School Services
The project site is within the Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD). Schools that would serve
the proposed project are shown in Table 3-7, CVUSD School Locations and Generation Factors for
Multiple -Family Attached Units. Table 3-8 also shows the District Generation Rate and projected
students generated by the project. The School District requires a Development Impact Fee of $4.08
per square foot of new residential construction for the construction of new facilities and the
maintenance of existing school facilities.
Table 3-7
CVUSD School Locations and Generation Factors for Multiple -Family Attached Units
School Level
Name School Location
Student Generation/
Number Students
Elementary
82225 Airport Boulevard
Westside Elementary School
0.4357/35.7
Thermal, CA
Intermediate
Toro Canyon 86150 Avenue 66
0.1107/9.0
Thermal, CA
High School
Coachella Valley High School 83800 Airport Boulevard
0.2019/16.5
Thermal, CA
Total
61.2 Students
3.6 Construction Activities
The entirety of the proposed developed area within the project site would be disturbed during
construction of the project. The Grading Plan shows there is an estimated 2,070 cubic yards of cut and
32,159 cubic yards of fill. To balance the site and support the proposed residential development area,
an estimated 30,089 cubic yards of select material is expected to be imported to the project site.
STAGING AREAS
The construction staging and laydown areas would occur within the project site. The project site would
be fenced during construction and access would be for construction vehicles only.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 Project Description
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND MIX OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
The project is anticipated to be under construction in 2024, with an estimated total construction
period of 290 days. The number and types of equipment to be used would vary on a daily basis, based
on the stage of construction; however, typical construction equipment would be used (e.g.,
concrete/industrial saws, dozers, tractors/loaders/ backhoes, graders, excavators, cranes, forklifts,
welders, cement and mortar mixers, pavers and paving equipment, rollers, and air compressors). The
duration for each stage of construction is estimated in Table 3-8, Summary of Construction Activities.
Table 3-8
Summary of Construction Activities
Equipment Description
SL
Number of
Equipment
Daily
Hours Operation
Total Construction
Days
Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers
3
10
6
10
Tractor, Loader, or Backhoes
4
10
84
10
Construction Truck Trips
10
8
10
Total Days
10
Grading
Excavators
1
60
6
60
Grader
1
60
6
60
Rubber Tired Dozer
1
60
6
60
Tractor, Loader, or Backhoes
3
60
6
60
Construction Truck Trips
100
60
Total Days
60
Building Construction
Crane
1
160
6
160
Forklift (Gradall)
3
80
6
80
Generator
1
80
6
80
Tractor, Loader or Backhoes
3
160
6
160
Welder
1
80
6
80
Truck Deliveries
20
60
Total Days
160
Paving/Landscape
Paver
2
20
8
20
Paving Equipment
2
20
8
20
Roller
2
5
8
5
Landscape Installation
30
8
30
Truck Deliveries
20
20
Total Days
30
Architectural Coating
Air Compressor
1
60
6
30
Total Construction
290
Public Review Draft I June 2023 3-35 Project Description
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3.7 Requested Project Approvals/Permitting
The IS/MND is intended to provide environmental review for full implementation of the project,
including all discretionary actions and ministerial permits associated with it. The City of La Quinta is
the Lead Agency with approval authority over the project. Below is the listing of permits and approvals
required for the project:
• General Plan Amendment
• Zone Change
• Conditional Use Permit to Allow Planned Unit Development
• Development Plan Approval
Public Review Draft I June 2023 3-36 Project Description
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the proposed project because the Initial Study
concluded that the proposed project would not result in significant unavoidable environmental
impacts once mitigation measures are implemented. The following Sections 4.1 through 4.21, provide
a discussion of the potential project impacts associated with the proposed General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change and the 80-unit residential project as identified in the Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration (IS/MND). Explanations are provided within each corresponding impact category
in this analysis.
Aesthetics
Less Than
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
21099, would the project:
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
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?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
Implementation of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not adversely
impact any scenic resources or obstruct or modify any existing vistas. Potential impacts to aesthetics
have been evaluated as part of the evaluation of the proposed project and have been evaluated for
compliance with the City of La Quinta General Plan polices and Zoning Code requirements which would
be confirmed through the City's review process for Planned Unit Developments. Compliance with the
City's review process would be reduced to less than significant for the potential of significant aesthetic
impacts associated with the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No Impact: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. For purposes of
determining significance under CEQA, a scenic vista is defined as a viewpoint that provides expansive
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.1-1 Aesthetics
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
views of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public and is generally designated by
public agencies to provide for their preservation. According to the City of La Quinta General Plan, the
project site is not designated as a scenic vista.
The frontage of the project site on Avenue 58 is identified as an Image Corridor; refer to Figure 4.1-1,
Imoge Corridor. The intent of the Image Corridor is to provide for the protection of scenic resource
views from a public right-of-way. The scenic resource views range from the intimate coves nestled in
the foothills, to the expansive views of the Santa Rosa Mountains. Presently along the project frontage
on Avenue 58 is overgrown vegetation that obstructs distant views of the foothills.
Consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, the project proposes Image Corridor enhancements
along Avenue 58. A landscape setback area of 15 feet (14,312 square feet of landscape area) is
proposed along the frontage of the project site. A total of 29,210 square feet of landscaping is
proposed. The landscape area includes a combination of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. A
meandering multimodal trail is proposed within the landscape to enhance pedestrian circulation. The
landscape along the frontage creates aesthetically pleasing views for motorists and pedestrians as well
as an entry statement for the project.
In accordance with the Zoning Code, residential structures proposed within 150 feet of an Image
Corridor shall not exceed a height of 22 feet. The project proposes three single -story structures that
would be within 150 feet of the Avenue 58 Image Corridor; refer to Figure 4.1-2, Corridor View. The
maximum height of the structures would be approximately 18 feet. The three single -story homes
would be located 145 feet from the closest residential uses, that are located north of Avenue 58. The
next closest two-story home to Avenue 58 would be 150 feet and to the closest existing residential
uses it would be 195 feet. Additionally, the project proposes landscaping, 6,600 square foot open space
lot, 26,200 square feet open space detention basin. Both of these areas would not have any multi-
story structures on them which allow distant views to the south. The proposed project would comply
with Image Corridor requirements to maintain views along Avenue 58 and potential impacts to scenic
vistas would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact: The project would not substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic
highway. The State Scenic Highway Program was established by the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from change that would
diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to State Highways. Highways may be designated as
scenic depending upon how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality
of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes upon the traveler's enjoyment of the
view. According to Caltrans, there are no designated or eligible state scenic highways within the
viewshed of the proposed project. Therefore, no impacts to scenic resources along a state scenic
highway would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.1-2
L � 1
N -
F rod Wa Atm D
V
Was Ara
w � a
f �
f
i
f
1
;<
r
_
1
e
1
t
1
yarnoico
1
A
�
l
#
—
1
1
r
A
a
1
1
1
1
r
1
1
1
r
1
1
i-
en i i
i w w w --—i—i—��
■
Ho
_ Avonkto 50
Legend
Roads
■ ■ M City Boundary
m Sphere of Influence
ANNEENNEEN Image Corridors
Source: City of La Quinta
August 2011
4i .n
m'
e
IS
1 i w i i a.rn�u..a
1
1
1
1 Avenue 64
w i i i i i OR i i
Source: City of La Quinta, General Plan Circulation Element2035; Adopted February 19, 2013, Amended November 19, 2013.
- approximate Project Location
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
e Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Image Corridors
VCS Environmental Figure 4.1-1
me
U
APN 764-01-012 (TTM 30092) a
B ZONING/GENERAL PLAN: RL/LDR W
EXISTING USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL <� —
b <
AVENUE 58 —
s ss ss ss s - _SS—
/Z-� — LOT A OFFU FOR DEDICAJ FOR
33040 SF PUBLIC STREET IMPRO MENTS
6
B b - LOTD-
I 6.600 SF
LOT C I •OPT SeA`E. :22T E
OPEN SPACE e4' � � � � 00 SF
r �
< 2
< EX;�TT GLO
TOT
LOT
A I I alliiA A II A A ItS, 1 ■Ifli 11 rc-10o B�IIII�IIIII�
100 0 100 200
scale 1 "= 100, feet
153'
R/W AVENUER
58 PRIVATE STREET D
R w 33' h:10', �
110 102' _ 40' _ 1Q'
, 1, � -
8' 2 4' 8'
NEW R/ +ULD C6
IC6 T a � EX R/W
EX. PAD ELEV 5 5' S 5> PAD ELEV: -60.10 PAD ELEV: -59.80
SECTION A -A 40 0 40 80
scale 1 "= 40' feet
Source: D&D Engineering, Inc.; August 11, 2022.
EN
:13 VCS Environmental
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Corridor View
Figure 4.1-2
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
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?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations that govern scenic quality. The proposed project is an undeveloped parcel that is situated
within an urbanized setting. The site is disturbed and in a declining aesthetic condition. The site is
adjacent to existing and planned single-family land uses. The proposed project would be compatible
with the type and pattern of existing land uses in the area. The project is located in an urbanized area.
For projects in an urbanized area, CEQA requires the project be evaluated for potential conflicts with
regulations that govern scenic quality. The relevant planning programs that would provide for the
protection of scenic quality on the project site and surrounding area would be the City of La Quinta
General Plan and Zoning Code.
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT
The General Plan Land Use Element provides goals to maintain community identity and development
quality for the City and its neighborhoods and identifies a series of policies to implement the goals.
Table 4.1-1, General Plan Consistency Analysis, is an evaluation of the consistency of the proposed
project with relevant goals provided in the Land Use Element that would govern scenic quality on the
project site.
Table 4.1-1
General Plan Consistency Analysis
Goal
Consistency Evaluation
GOAL LU-1: Land use compatibility throughout City.
In accordance with Section 9.60.330 of the City of La
Quinta Zoning Code, the project was required to
prepare and submit a massing plan. The massing plan
depicts the relationship of the structures within the
project site to each other and to development
adjacent to the project and its compatibility with
surrounding development. With preparation and
approval of the massing study, the project would
demonstrate the project design of one- and two-story
units would be consistent with the surrounding single -
story units and would be consistent with Goal LU-1.
The project proposes residential land uses that would
be adjacent to existing residential land uses, as well as
planned residential land uses and would not introduce
incompatible land uses. The project would comply with
Image Corridor requirements by including a 15-foot
landscape setback along Avenue 58 and limiting the
height of structures within 150 feet of Avenue 58 to
under 22 feet, which would be compatible with height
and setback requirements provided for the existing
residential uses located north of Avenue 58. The project
would be setback at an adequate distance to existing
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.1-5 Aesthetics
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Goa
Consistency Evaluation
residential areas, where there would be no adverse
operation effects to existing residential areas. The
project would not redirect through existing
neighborhoods or involve any long-term activities that
would affect the quality and integrity of existing
residential neighborhoods. As you enter the proposed
community through its main entrance along Avenue 58,
you will see a one-story recreation building to the west,
along with a large landscaped open space area along
the northern edge of the property which backs up to
three one-story homes, which has been carefully
designed to comply and promote the City's view
corridor program. The lower architectural elements and
open space along the property's northern edge create
a viewshed that is seamless with the northern existing
neighborhoods, thereby illustrating a land use
compatibility with well -established homes. As shown
on the attached Preliminary Site and Landscape Plan,
the Corridor View Figure and Recreation Building
Architectural Plans, this proposed community has been
integrated with open space, as well as amenities to
soften and enhance the views to create a well thought-
out and designed neighborhood. The structures have
been tapered from one-story homes (approximately 18
feet in height) along the northern edge to two-story
homes (approximately 25 feet in height) as the
community transitions to the south. Adjacent land uses
to the south, east and west are planned for single-
family residential homes which again are compatible
with the proposed community.
GOAL LU-2: High quality design that compliments and
The proposed project has been designed to promote
enhances the City.
residential amenities and flexibility in design. The
cluster layout of the homes has been designed to
achieve visual diversity and interest in the street scene
through varying setbacks, articulated building masses
or enhanced elevations on residences plotted on
corner lots. The proposed project has been designed to
be visually compatible with similar architectural
elements of Spanish, Mediterranean and Santa Barbara
influences that are common in La Quinta. The project
proposes a minimum of four floor plans, with three
elevations and three -color schemes per elevation to
provide aesthetic variety and interest. No identical
single-family detached plan and elevation would be
permitted side -by -side and two houses on either side
of a specific lot would be required to use different
color schemes. The homes would be designed so that
living activities are oriented towards the street with
emphasis on porches, courtyards, entries, and
windows.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.1-6 Aesthetics
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Consistency Evaluation
The proposed project includes a landscape treatment
program consisting of plants, shrubs, trees and
groundcover, including 15 feet of landscape setback
along Avenue 58 in accordance with the Image Corridor
requirements, which would enhance the streetscape
over its existing condition.
GOAL LU-3: Safe and identifiable neighborhoods that
The project has been designed as a planned unit
provide a sense of place.
development that would provide open space and
recreation amenities and landscape treatments to
create an identifiable community. The project would
comply with Fire Protection and Police Protection
requirements to ensure safety for its residents.
GOAL LU-4: Maintenance and protection of existing
Similar to the existing residential uses located north of
neighborhoods.
the project, the proposed project would limit the height
of structures along Highway 58 to less than 22 feet
which would maintain privacy for the existing and
proposed residential uses. The closest two-story homes
to Avenue 58 would be 150 feet and the closest existing
residential uses would be 195 feet. Additionally, the
project proposes a perimeter block wall around the
project which would minimize operational impacts. The
project lighting would be similar to the type and level of
existing lighting provided in the project area and it
would comply with the Municipal Code lighting
requirements which would ensure that all exterior
lighting would be confined to the property to avoid
spillover lighting impacts to adjoining properties. The
project would take access off of Avenue 58 and would
not access through or redirect traffic to existing
residential neighborhoods.
GOAL LU-5: A broad range of housing types and choices
The proposed medium density project would provide
for all residents of the City.
an additional range of housing types in the City.
ZONING CODE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
The project site is currently zoned as Low Density residential. To allow for deviation of the zoning code
site development standards, Planned Unit Development has been proposed as part of the approval of
a conditional use permit. The purpose of the Planned Unit Development is to allow flexibility in the
design of residential projects and encourage the development of creative high -quality residential
projects that provide attractive living environments in a setting that is different from a single-family
development.
In accordance with the City of La Quinta Zoning Code, the following findings are required prior to
the approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) project:
Consistency with General Plan. As shown in Table 4.1-1 and Table 4.11-11 the project would
be consistent with relevant policies provided in the City of La Quinta General Plan.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.1-7 Aesthetics
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2. Consistency with the Provisions of the Zoning Code. The project would be consistent with
the provisions of zoning code findings relevant to the PUD requirements, including design
guideline requirements, development standard requirements, common area requirements,
and parking requirements.
3. Compliance with CEQA. The City of La Quinta has recommended that the appropriate level of
environmental documentation forthe proposed project is an MIND. This Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and analyzes the
potential direct, indirect, and cumulative effects associated with implementation of the
proposed project. The IS/MND determined that with incorporation of mitigation measures,
potential impacts to the environment would be less than significant. The proposed project
would be consistent with PUD CEQA finding.
4. Site Design. The proposed project has been designed to promote residential amenities and
flexibility in design. The cluster layout of the homes has been designed to achieve visual
diversity and interest in the street scene through varying setbacks, articulated building
masses or enhanced elevations on residences plotted on corner lots. A 15-foot landscape
setback is proposed along the frontage of the project site to enhance the streetscape and to
help conserve distance views along Avenue 58. In compliance with Image Corridor
requirements, the maximum height of residential uses within 150 feet of the Avenue 58
Image Corridor has been limited to approximately 18 feet. The closest two-story homes to
Avenue 58 would be 150 feet.
5. Architecture. The project proposes three architecture styles and a minimum of four floor
plans, with three elevations and three -color schemes per elevation to provide aesthetic
variety and interest. No identical single-family detached plan and elevation would be
permitted side -by -side and two houses on either side of a specific lot would be required to
use different color schemes. The homes would be designed so that living activities are
oriented towards the street with emphasis on porches, courtyards, entries and windows. The
project's proposed architectural and site design would be consistent with the intent PUD
architectural and site design finding.
6. Landscape Design. As shown previously in Figures 3-14a and 3-14b, Conceptual Landscape
Plan, the project proposes landscaping that includes a mix of drought tolerant groundcover,
shrubs and trees that would provide a unifying influence to enhance the visual continuity of
the project. A total of 66,550 square feet of landscaping would be provided, including 29,210
square feet of community landscaping, 6,600 square foot open space lot, 4,540 square feet
of Avenue 58 Image Corridor landscaping and 26,200 square feet of detention basin
landscaping.
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Site Development Review for the project would be conducted as part of the Planned Unit Development
(PUD) request. The purpose of a site development review is to ensure that the development and
design standards of this zoning code, including, but not limited to, permitted uses, development
standards and supplemental regulations are satisfied. In accordance with Section 9.210.010 of the
Zoning Code, the following findings shall be made by the decision -making authority prior to the
approval of any site development permit review:
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.1-8
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
• Consistency with General Plan. With approval of the General Plan Amendment, the project
would be consistent with the General Plan. As shown in Table 4.1-1 and Table 4.11-1, the
project would be consistent with relevant policies provided in the City of La Quinta General
Plan.
• Consistency with Zoning Code. The project is proposing a PUD in accordance with the Zoning
Code. As discussed above, the project would meet the required findings for a PUD, and
therefore, would be consistent with the Zoning Code.
• Compliance with CEQA. Processing and approval of the permit application in compliance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared in accordance with CEQA
and analyzes the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative effects associated with
implementation of the proposed project. The IS/MND determined that with incorporation of
mitigation measures, potential impacts to the environment would be less than significant. The
proposed project would be consistent with PUD CEQA finding.
• Architectural Design. The proposed project has been designed to be visually compatible with
similar architectural elements that are common in La Quinta. The overall project's architecture
reflects a combination of Spanish, Mediterranean, and Santa Barbara design themes. In each
architecture design theme key, architectural elements are reflected including building mass,
materials, colors, architectural element detail and roof style.
• Site Design. The cluster layout of the homes would be designed to achieve visual diversity
and interest in the street scene through varying setbacks, articulated building masses or
enhanced elevations on residences plotted on corner lots. Landscape courtyards have been
incorporated into the project design. In accordance with PUD requirements, the project
would provide four open space amenities for residents.
• Landscape Design. The project proposes a comprehensive landscape plan within the project
site and along the frontage of the property. The landscape treatment for the project is
intended to complement the Coachella Valley desert environment. A total of 66,550 square
feet of landscaping would be provided, including 29,210 square feet of community
landscaping, 6,600 square foot open space lot, 4,540 square feet of Avenue 58 Image
Corridor landscaping and 26,200 square feet of detention basin landscaping.
• The project proposes Image Corridor enhancements along Avenue 58. A total of 4,540 square
feet of landscaping is proposed on the Avenue 58 landscape corridor along the frontage of the
project site. The landscape area includes a combination of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. A
meandering multimodal trail is proposed within the landscape to enhance pedestrian
circulation. The landscape along the frontage creates aesthetically pleasing views for motorists
and pedestrians as well as an entry statement for the project.
DETERMINATION OF CONFLICTS WITH REGULATIONS GOVERNING SCENIC QUALITY
The relevant polices governing the scenic quality of the project would be the City of La Quinta
General Plan and Zoning Code Planned Unit Development (PUD) requirements. As discussed above,
the project would be consistent with relevant policies provided in the City of La Quinta General Plan
and would be consistent with the required design findings for a PUD. Through the City's design
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.1-9 Aesthetics
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
review process, the City of La Quinta would reaffirm that the design of the project would be
consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Code Planned Unit Development requirements and would
not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality that could
substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings. Therefore, potential aesthetic impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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 would not create a new source of substantial light or glare
that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. The area surrounding the project is
currently developed with urbanized land uses that provide various levels of nighttime lighting. The
operation of the proposed project would introduce new sources of lighting into the project area. The
construction activities for the proposed project would occur during the day. Therefore, no temporary
nighttime construction lighting impacts would occur.
Section 9.100.150 of the Municipal Code, Outdoor Lighting, provide standards for outdoor lighting
which allow adequate energy efficient lighting for public safety while minimizing adverse effects of
lighting such as lighting which has a detrimental effect on astronomical observations; Inefficiently
utilizes scarce electrical energy; or creates a public nuisance or safety hazard.
The proposed project would be required to comply with the following Municipal Code General
Lighting requirements:
• Shielding. All exterior illuminating devices, except that exempt from this section and those
regulated by shall be fully or partially shielded as required in the table contained in this
subsection.
— "Fully shielded" means the fixture shall be shielded in such a manner that light rays
emitted by the fixture, either directly from the lamp or indirectly from the fixture,
are projected below a horizontal plane running through the lowest point on the
fixture where light is emitted, thus preventing the emission of above the horizontal.
— "Partially shielded" means the fixture shall be shielded in such a manner that the
bottom edge of the shield is below the plane centerline of the light source (lamp),
minimizing the emission of light rays above the horizontal.
• Filtration. Those outdoor light fixtures requiring a filter per the table following shall be
equipped with a filter consisting of a glass, acrylic or translucent enclosure. Quartz glass does
not meet this requirement.
• Height. Building -mounted light shall be installed below the eave line. Lights shall be located
no more than eight (8) feet above grade.
• Exterior Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be located and directed so as not to shine directly
on adjacent properties.
• Requirements for Shielding and Filtering. The requirements for shielding and filtering light
emissions from outdoor light fixtures shall be as set forth in Table 9-7.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.1-10 Aesthetics
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The project would be required to submit an application to the City providing evidence that the
proposed work would comply with Section 9.100.150 of the Municipal Code, which would include
plans indicating the location on the premises and the type of illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps,
height, supports, and other devices as well as the description of the illuminating devices, fixtures,
lamps, supports, shielding, filtering and other devices. This description may include but is not limited
to, wattage, lighting output, manufacturers catalog cuts, and drawings. With compliance with
Section 9.100.150 of the Municipal Code, potential light and glare impacts would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.1-11 Aesthetics
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources
are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may
referto the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In
determining whether impacts to forest resources,
Less Than
including timberland, are significant environmental
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
by the California Department of Forestry and Fire
Incorporated
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 by the 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?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not convert existing or planned
agriculture land uses to non -agriculture land uses or convert existing or planned timberland or forest
land uses to non -timberland or forest land uses. No adverse impacts to agriculture, timberland or
forest land uses would occur.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.2-1 Agricultural and Forestry Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
RESIDENTIAL 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?
No Impact: The project would not Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use. According to the California Department of Conservation
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, there are no Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance on the project site or the surrounding area. The Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program identifies the project site Other Lands. Therefore, no impacts to Prime
Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact: The project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract. The project site is currently zoned Low Density Residential. The surrounding properties
to the north, south, east, and west are also zoned Low Density. According to the property title, the
project site is not under a Williamson Act contract. The development of the site would not conflict with
any lands zoned for agriculture uses on the project site or with surrounding properties.
Implementation of the proposed project would have no impact regarding potential conflicts with
existing agriculture zoning or Williamson Act contracts on the property.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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))?
No Impact: The project would not conflict with the existing zoning for or cause rezoning of forest land
or timberland. The City of La Quinta General Plan Natural Resources Element does not identify any
forest lands or timberland in the City. Additionally, the project site is currently zoned Low Density
Residential and would not cause a rezone of lands that are zoned for forest land or timberland.
Therefore, no impacts to forest land, timberland or lands zoned for timberland would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use?
No Impact: The project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -
forest use. There are no existing forest lands or timberland resources on the property and the project
site is not zoned for timberland production. Implementation of the proposed project would not result
in the loss of forest land.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.2-2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
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?
No Impact: The project would not 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. The project site and surrounding properties do not contain farmland
or timberland resources. The construction and operation of the proposed project would be confined
to the project site and would not cause any onsite or offsite conversion of farmland or forest land to
non -agriculture uses or non -forest uses.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.2-3 Agricultural and Forestry Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.3 Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by
Less Than
the applicable air quality management district or air
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
following determinations. Would the project: Ad
11
Incorporated
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?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The following analysis is based on the Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact
Analysis prepared by Vista Environmental on October 28, 2021. The report is presented in its entirety
in Appendix A.
Background
Air pollutants are generally classified as either criteria pollutants or non -criteria pollutants. Federal
ambient air quality standards have been established for criteria pollutants, whereas no ambient
standards have been established for non -criteria pollutants. For some criteria pollutants, separate
standards have been set for different periods. Most standards have been set to protect public health.
For some pollutants, standards have been based on other values (such as protection of crops,
protection of materials, or avoidance of nuisance conditions).
CRITERIA POLLUTANTS AND OZONE PRECURSORS
The criteria pollutants consist of ozone, NOx, CO, SOx, lead (Pb), and particulate matter (PM). The
ozone precursors consist of NOx and VOC. These pollutants can harm your health and the environment,
and cause property damage. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calls these pollutants
"criteria" air pollutants because it regulates them by developing human health based and/or
environmentally based criteria for setting permissible levels. The following provides descriptions of
each of the criteria pollutants and ozone precursors.
Nitrogen Oxides: Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) is the generic term for a group of highly reactive gases which
contain nitrogen and oxygen. While most NOx are colorless and odorless, concentrations of NO2 can
often be seen as a reddish -brown layer over many urban areas. NOx forms when fuel is burned at high
temperatures, as in a combustion process. The primary man-made sources of NOx are motor vehicles,
electric utilities, and other industrial, commercial, and residential sources that burn fuel. NOx reacts
with other pollutants to form, ground -level ozone, nitrate particles, acid aerosols, as well as NO2, which
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-1 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
causes respiratory problems. NOx and the pollutants formed from NOx can be transported over long
distances, following the patterns of prevailing winds.
Ozone: Ozone (03) is not usually emitted directly into the air but in the vicinity of ground -level and is
created by a chemical reaction between NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the presence of
sunlight. Motor vehicle exhaust, industrial emissions, gasoline vapors, chemical solvents as well as
natural sources emit NOx and VOC that help form ozone. Ground -level ozone is the primary constituent
of smog. Sunlight and hot weather cause ground -level ozone to form with the greatest concentrations
usually occurring downwind from urban areas. Ozone is subsequently considered a regional pollutant.
Ground -level ozone is a respiratory irritant and an oxidant that increases susceptibility to respiratory
infections and can cause substantial damage to vegetation and other materials. Because NOx and VOC
are ozone precursors, the health effects associated with ozone are also indirect health effects
associated with significant levels of NOx and VOC emissions.
Carbon Monoxide: Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas that is formed when carbon in
fuel is not burned completely. It is a component of motor vehicle exhaust, which contributes
approximately 56% of all CO emissions nationwide. In cities, 85% to 95% of all CO emissions may come
from motor vehicle exhaust. Other sources of CO emissions include industrial processes (such as
metals processing and chemical manufacturing), residential wood burning, and natural sources such
as forest fires. Woodstoves, gas stoves, cigarette smoke, and unvented gas and kerosene space heaters
are indoor sources of CO. Since CO concentrations are strongly associated with motor vehicle
emissions, high CO concentrations generally occur in the immediate vicinity of roadways with high
traffic volumes and traffic congestion, active parking lots, and in automobile tunnels. Areas adjacent
to heavily traveled and congested intersections are particularly susceptible to high CO concentrations.
High levels of CO can affect even healthy people. People who breathe high levels of CO can develop
vision problems, reduced ability to work or learn, reduced manual dexterity, and difficulty performing
complex tasks. At extremely high levels, CO is poisonous and can cause death.
Sulfur Oxides: Sulfur Oxide (SOx) gases are formed when fuel containing sulfur, such as coal and oil is
burned, as well as from the refining of gasoline. SOx dissolves easily in water vapor to form acid and
interacts with other gases and particles in the air to form sulfates and other products that can be
harmful to people and the environment.
Lead: Lead (Pb) is a metal found naturally in the environment as well as manufactured products. The
major sources of lead emissions have historically been vehicles and industrial sources. Due to the phase
out of leaded gasoline, metal processing is now the primary source of lead emissions into the air. High
levels of lead in the air are typically only found near lead smelters, waste incinerators, utilities, and
lead -acid battery manufacturers. Exposure of fetuses, infants and children to low levels of Pb can
adversely affect the development and function of the central nervous system, leading to learning
disorders, distractibility, inability to follow simple commands, and lower intelligence quotient. In
adults, increased lead levels are associated with increased blood pressure.
Particulate Matter: Particle matter (PM) is the term for a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets
found in the air. PM is made up of a number of components including acids (such as nitrates and
sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles. The size of particles is directly linked to
their potential for causing health problems. Particles that are less than 10 micrometers in diameter
(PM1o) that are also known as Respirable Particulate Matter are the particles that generally pass
through the throat and nose and enter the lungs. Once inhaled, these particles can affect the heart
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-2 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
and lungs and cause serious health effects. Particles that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter
(PMZ.$) that are also known as Fine Particulate Matter have been designated as a subset of PM10 due
to their increased negative health impacts and its ability to remain suspended in the air longer and
travel further.
Volatile Organic Compounds: Hydrocarbons are organic gases that are formed from hydrogen and
carbon and sometimes other elements. Hydrocarbons that contribute to the formation of 03 are
referred to and regulated as VOCs (also referred to as reactive organic gases). Combustion engine
exhaust, oil refineries, and fossil -fueled power plants are the sources of hydrocarbons. Other sources
of hydrocarbons include evaporation from petroleum fuels, solvents, dry cleaning solutions, and paint.
VOC is not classified as a criteria pollutant since VOCs by themselves are not a known source of adverse
health effects. The primary health effects of VOCs result from the formation of 03 and its related health
effects. High levels of VOCs in the atmosphere can interfere with oxygen intake by reducing the
amount of available oxygen through displacement. Carcinogenic forms of hydrocarbons, such as
benzene, are considered toxic air contaminants (TACs). There are no separate health standards for
VOCs as a group.
OTHER POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN
Toxic Air Contaminants: In addition to the above -listed criteria pollutants, toxic air contaminants (TACs)
are another group of pollutants of concern. TAC is a term that is defined under the California Clean Air
Act and consists of the same substances that are defined as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) in the
Federal Clean Air Act. There are over seven hundred different types of TACs with varying degrees of
toxicity. Sources of TACs include industrial processes such as petroleum refining and chrome plating
operations, commercial operations such as gasoline stations and dry cleaners, and motor vehicle
exhaust. Cars and trucks release at least forty different toxic air contaminants. The most important of
these TACs, in terms of health risk, are diesel particulates, benzene, formaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and
acetaldehyde. Public exposure to TACs can result from emissions from normal operations as well as
from accidental releases. Health effects of TACs include cancer.
Asbestos: Asbestos is listed as a TAC by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and as a HAP by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Asbestos occurs naturally in mineral formations
and crushing or breaking these rocks, through construction or other means, can release asbestiform
fibers into the air. Asbestos emissions can result from the sale or use of asbestos -containing materials,
road surfacing with such materials, grading activities, and surface mining. The risk of disease is
dependent upon the intensity and duration of exposure. When inhaled, asbestos fibers may remain in
the lungs and with time may be linked to such diseases as asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma.
Regulatory Setting
The project site is located within the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB). The
air quality at the project site is addressed through the efforts of various international, federal, state,
regional, and local government agencies. These agencies work jointly, as well as individually, to
improve air quality through legislation, regulations, planning, policy -making, education, and a variety
of programs. The agencies responsible for improving the air quality are discussed below.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-3 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
FEDERAL
The EPA handles global, international, national and interstate air pollution issues and policies. The EPA
sets national vehicle and stationary source emission standards, oversees approval of all State
Implementation Plans, conducts research, and provides guidance in air pollution programs and sets
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), also known as federal standards. There are six
common air pollutants, called criteria air pollutants, which were identified resulting from provisions of
the Clean Air Act of 1970. The six criteria pollutants are Ozone, Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5),
Nitrogen Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Lead and Sulfur Dioxide. The NAAQS were set up to protect public
health, including that of sensitive individuals.
NAAQS pollutants were identified using medical evidence and are shown in Table 4.3-1, State and
Federal Criteria Pollutant Standards.
Table 4.3-1
State and Federal Criteria Pollutant Standards
Concentration/Averaging Time IF
Air Pollutant
JMost Relevant Effects
Federal Primary
California Standards
Standards
(a) Pulmonary function decrements and localized lung edema in
humans and animals; (b) Risk to public health implied by
0.09 ppm / 1-hour
alterations in pulmonary morphology and host defense in animals;
Ozone (Os)
0.070 ppm, / 8 hour
(c) Increased mortality risk; (d) Risk to public health implied by
altered connective tissue metabolism and altered pulmonary
0.07 ppm / 8-hour
morphology in animals after long-term exposures and pulmonary
function decrements in chronically exposed humans; (e)
Vegetation damage; and (f) Property damage.
(a) Aggravation of angina pectoris and other aspects of coronary
Carbon
20.0 ppm / 1-hour
35.0 ppm / 1-hour
heart disease; (b) Decreased exercise tolerance in persons with
Monoxide
peripheral vascular disease and lung disease; (c) Impairment of
(Co)
9.0 ppm / 8-hour
9.0 ppm / 8-hour
central nervous system functions; and (d) Possible increased risk
to fetuses.
(a) Potential to aggravate chronic respiratory disease and
Nitrogen
0.18 ppm 1-hour
/
100 ppb 1-hour
/
respiratory symptoms in sensitive groups; (b) Risk to public health
Dioxide
0.030 ppm /annual
0.053 ppm /annual
implied by pulmonary and extra -pulmonary biochemical and
(NO2)
cellular changes and pulmonary structural changes; and (c)
Contribution to atmospheric discoloration.
Sulfur
0.25 ppm / 1-hour
75 ppb / 1-hour
(a) Bronchoconstriction accompanied by symptoms which may
Dioxide
include wheezing, shortness of breath and chest tightness, during
(SOz)
0.04 ppm / 24-hour
0.14 ppm/annual
exercise or physical activity in persons with asthma.
P Y Y
Suspended
(a) Exacerbation of symptoms in sensitive patients with
Particulate
50 µg/m3 / 24-hour
150 µg/m3 / 24-hour
respiratory or cardiovascular disease; (b) Declines in pulmonary
Matter
20 µg/m3 / annual
function growth in children; and (c) Increased risk of premature
(PM1o)
death from heart or lung diseases in elderly.
Suspended
Particulate
12 µg/m3 /annual
35 µg/m3 / 24-hour
Matter
12 µg/m3 / annual
(PMz.$)
(a) Decrease in ventilatory function; (b) Aggravation of asthmatic
symptoms; (c) Aggravation of cardio-pulmonary disease; (d)
Sulfates
25 µg/m3 / 24-hour
No Federal Standards
Vegetation damage; (e) Degradation of visibility; and (f) Property
damage.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-4 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Concentration/Averaging Time
Air Pollutant
Most Relevant Effects
Federal Primary
California Standards
Standards
Lead
1.5 / 30-day
0.15 µgW/3-month
(a) Learning disabilities; and (b) Impairment of blood formation
µg/m3
rolling
and nerve conduction.
Extinction coefficient
Visibility impairment on days when relative humidity is less than
of 0.23 per kilometer -
70%.
Visibility
visibility of ten miles
Reducing
or more due to
No Federal Standards
Particles
particles when
relative humidity is
less than 70%.
Source: Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis; October 28, 2021.
As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the EPA requires each state with federal nonattainment
areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates the means to attain
the national standards. The SIP must integrate federal, state, and local components and regulations to
identify specific measures to reduce pollution, using a combination of performance standards and
market -based programs within the timeframe identified in the SIP. The CARB defines attainment as
the category given to an area with no violations in the past three years. As indicated in Table 4.3-2,
Coachella Valley Portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin Attainment Status, the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB)
has been designated by EPA for the national standards as a non -attainment area for ozone and PM 1o.
Currently, the SSAB is in attainment with the national ambient air quality standards for CO, NO2, S02,
PM2.5, and lead.
Table 4.3-2
Coachella Valley Portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin Attainment Status
Criteria Pollutan
Standard
Averaging Time
Designate
Attainment Datebi
NAAQS
7CAAQS
19791-Hour
Attainment
12/31/2013
(0.12 ppm)
1-Hour Ozonece
1-Hour
(0.09 ppm)
Nonattainment
N/A
NAAQS
1997 8-Hour
Nonattainment (Severe-15)
6/15/2019
(0.08 ppm)
NAAQS
2008 8-Hour
Nonattainment (Severe-15)
7/20/2027
8-Hour Ozonede
(0.075 ppm)
NAAQS
2015 8-Hour
Pending— Expect Nonattainment
Pending
(0.070 ppm)
(Severe)
CAAQS
8-Hour (0.070 ppm)
Nonattainment
Beyond 2032
NAAQS
1-Hour (35 ppm)
Unclassifiable/Attainment
N/A (attained)
8-Hour (9 ppm)
CO
1-Hour (20 ppm)
6/11/2007
CAAQS
8-Hour (9 ppm)
Attainment
(attained)
NAAQS
2010 1-Hour (0.10 ppm)
Unclassifiable/Attainment
N/A (attained)
NO2ee
NAAQS
1971 Annual (0.053 ppm)
Unclassifiable/Attainment
N/A (attained)
1-Hour (0.18 ppm)
CAAQS
Annual (0.030 ppm)
Attainment
---
Public Review Draft I June 2023
4.3-5
Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Criteria Pollutant
Standard
Averaging Time
Designationai
Attainment Dateb)
NAAQS
2010 1-Hour (75 ppb)
Designations Pending (expect
N/A (attained)
Unclassifiable/Attainment)
502f)
NAAQS
1971 24-Hour (0.14 ppm)
Unclassifiable/Attainment
N/A (attained)
1971 Annual (0.03 ppm)
NAAQS
1987 24-hour
Nonattainment (Serious)
12/31/2006
(150 µg/m3)
PM10gi
24-hour (50 µg/m3)
CAAQS
Annual (20 µg/m3)
Nonattainment
N/A
NAAQS
2006 24-Hour
Unclassifiable/Attainment
N/A (attained)
(35 µg/m3)
NAAQS
1997 Annual
Unclassifiable/Attainment
N/A (attained)
PM2.5h)
(15.0 4g/m3)
NAAQS
2012 Annual
Unclassifiable/Attainment
N/A (attained)
(12.0 4g/m3)
CAAQS
Annual (12.0 µg/m3)
Attainment
N/A
Lead
NAAQS
2008 3-Months Rolling
Attainment
N/A (attained)
(0.15 µg/m3)
Notes:
a)
U.S. EPA often only declares Nonattainment areas; everywhere else is listed as Unclassifiable/Attainment or Unclassifiable.
b)
A design value below the NAAQS for data through the full year or smog season prior to the attainment date is typically required for
attainment demonstration.
c)
The 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS (0.12 ppm) was revoked, effective June 15, 2005; the Coachella Valley had not timely attained this standard
by 11/15/07 "severe-17" deadline.
d)
The 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (0.075 ppm) was revised to 0.070 ppm. Effective 12/28/15 with classifications and implementation goals to
be finalized by 10/1/17; the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (0.08 ppm) was revoked in the 2008 ozone implementation rule, effective
4/6/15;there are continuing obligations under the revoked 1997 and revised 2008 ozone until they are attained.
e)
New NO2 1-hour standard, effective August 2, 2010; attainment designations January 20, 2012; annual NO2 standard retained.
f)
The 1971 annual and 24-hour Sot standards were revoked, effective August 23, 2010; however, these 1971 standards will remain in effect
until one year after U.S. EPA promulgates area designations for the 2010 S02 1-hour standard. Final area designations expected 12/31/2020
expected to be designated Unclassifiable /Attainment.
g)
Annual PM10 standard was revoked, effective December 18, 2006; 24-hour PM10 NAAQS deadline was 12/31/2006; SCAQMD request for
attainment redesignation was postponed pending additional monitoring.
h)
The annual PM2.5 standard was revised on 1/15/15, effective 3/18/13, from 15.0 µg/m3 to 12.0 1g/m3.
Source:
Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions ImpactAnolysis; October 28, 2021.
STATE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD
The California Air Resources Board (CARB), which is a part of the California Environmental Protection
Agency, is responsible for the coordination and administration of both federal and state air pollution
control programs within California. In this capacity, the CARB conducts research, sets the California
Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control
measures, provides oversight of local programs, and prepares the SIP. The CAAQS for criteria pollutants
are shown above in Table 4.3-2. In addition, the CARB establishes emission standards for motor
vehicles sold in California, consumer products (e.g., hairspray, aerosol paints, and barbeque lighter
fluid), and various types of commercial equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce
vehicular emissions.
The Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB) has been designated by the CARB as a non -attainment area for ozone
and PM1o. Currently, the SSAB is in attainment with the ambient air quality standards for CO, NO2, S02,
PM23, lead, and sulfates and is unclassified for visibility reducing particles and Hydrogen Sulfide.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-6 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
REGIONAL
South Coast Air Quality Management District
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) develops rules and regulations, establishes
permitting requirements for stationary sources, inspects emission sources, and enforces such
measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. SCAQMD is directly responsible for
reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this requirement
by preparing a sequence of AQMPs. The Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP) was
adopted by the SCAQMD Board on March 3, 2016, and was adopted by CARB on March 23, 2017, for
inclusion into the SIP. The 2016 AQMP was prepared in order to meet the following standards:
• 8-hour Ozone (75 ppb) by 2032
• Annual PM2.5 (12 µg/m3) by 2021-2025
• 8-hour Ozone (80 ppb) by 2024 (updated from the 2007 and 2012 AQMPs)
• 1-hour Ozone (120 ppb) by 2023 (updated from the 2012 AQMP)
• 24-hour PMZ.S (35 µg/m3) by 2019 (updated from the 2012 AQMP)
In addition to meeting the above standards, the 2016 AQMP also includes revisions to the attainment
demonstrations for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS. The prior 2012
AQMP was prepared in order to demonstrate attainment with the 24-hour PM2.S standard by 2014
through adoption of all feasible measures. The prior 2007 AQMP demonstrated attainment with the
1997 8-hour ozone (80 ppb) standard by 2023, through implementation of future improvements in
control techniques and technologies. These "black box' emissions reductions represent 65% of the
remaining NOx emission reductions by 2023 in order to show attainment with the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Given the magnitude of these needed emissions reductions, additional NOx control measures
have been provided in the 2016 AQMP.
The 2016 AQMP provides a new approach that focuses on available, proven and cost effective
alternatives to traditional strategies, while seeking to achieve multiple goals in partnership with other
entities to promote reductions in GHG emissions and TAC emissions as well as efficiencies in energy
use, transportation, and goods movement. The 2016 AQMP recognizes the critical importance of
working with other agencies to develop funding and other incentives that encourage the accelerated
transition of vehicles, buildings and industrial facilities to cleaner technologies in a manner that
benefits not only air quality, but also local businesses and the regional economy.
Although SCAQMD is responsible for regional air quality planning efforts, it does not have the authority
to directly regulate air quality issues associated with plans and new development projects throughout
the SSAB. Instead, this is controlled through local jurisdictions in accordance with CEQA. In order to
assist local jurisdictions with air quality compliance issues the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD
CEQA Handbook), prepared by SCAQMD, 1993, with the most current updates found at http://
www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/hdbk.html, was developed in accordance with the projections and programs
detailed in the AQMPs. The purpose of the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook is to assist Lead Agencies, as well
as consultants, project proponents, and other interested parties in evaluating a proposed project's
potential air quality impacts. Specifically, the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook explains the procedures that
SCAQMD recommends be followed for the environmental review process required by CEQA. The
SCAQMD CEQA Handbook provides direction on how to evaluate potential air quality impacts, how to
determine whether these impacts are significant, and how to mitigate these impacts. The SCAQMD
intends that by providing this guidance, the air quality impacts of plans and development proposals
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-7 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
will be analyzed accurately and consistently throughout the SSAB, and adverse impacts will be
minimized.
The following lists the SCAQMD rules that are applicable but not limited to all land development
projects in the SSAB.
• Rule 402— Nuisance. Rule 402 prohibits a person from discharging from any source whatsoever
such quantities of air contaminants or other material which causes injury, detriment, nuisance,
or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the
comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a
natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. Compliance with Rule
402 will reduce local air quality and odor impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.
• Rule 403 — Fugitive Dust. Rule 403 governs emissions of fugitive dust during construction
activities and requires that no person shall cause or allow the emissions of fugitive dust such
that dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line or the dust emission
exceeds 20% opacity if the dust is from the operation of a motorized vehicle. Compliance with
this rule is achieved through application of standard Best Available Control Measures
Compliance with these rules would reduce local air quality impacts to nearby sensitive
receptors.
• Rules 1108 and 1108.1— Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt. Rules 1108 and 1108.1 govern the
sale, use, and manufacturing of asphalt and limits the VOC content in asphalt. This rule
regulates the VOC contents of asphalt used during construction as well as any on -going
maintenance during operations. Therefore, all asphalt used during construction and operation
of the proposed project must comply with SCAQMD Rules 1108 and 1108.1.
• Rule 1113 — Architectural Coatings. Rule 1113 governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of
architectural coatings and limits the VOC content in sealers, coatings, paints and solvents. This
rule regulates the VOC contents of paints available during construction. Therefore, all paints
and solvents used during construction and operation of the proposed project must comply
with SCAQMD Rule 1113.
• Rule 1143 — Paint Thinners. Rule 1143 governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of paint
thinners and multi -purpose solvents that are used in thinning of coating materials, cleaning of
coating application equipment, and other solvent cleaning operations. This rule regulates the
VOC content of solvents used during construction. Solvents used during construction and
operation of the proposed project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1143.
Southern California Association of Governments
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the regional planning agency for Los
Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties and addresses regional
issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development and the environment. SCAG
is the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the majority of the southern
California region and is the largest MPO in the nation. With respect to air quality planning, SCAG has
prepared the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Connect
SoCal), adopted September 3, 2020, and the 2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (2019
FTIP), adopted September 2018, which addresses regional development and growth forecasts.
Public Review Draft I June 2023
4.3-8
Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Although the Connect SoCaland 2019 FTIP are primarily planning documents for future transportation
projects, a key component of these plans is to integrate land use planning with transportation planning
that promotes higher density infill development in close proximity to existing transit service. These
plans form the basis for the land use and transportation components of the AQMP, which are utilized
in the preparation of air quality forecasts and in the consistency, analysis included in the AQMP. The
Connect SoCal, 2019 FTIP, and AQMP are based on projections originating within the City and County
General Plans.
LOCAL
City of La Quinta
Local jurisdictions, such as the City of La Quinta, have the authority and responsibility to reduce air
pollution through its police power and decision -making authority. Specifically, the City is responsible
for the assessment and mitigation of air emissions resulting from its land use decisions. The City is also
responsible for the implementation of transportation control measures as outlined in the AQMPs.
Examples of such measures include bus turnouts, energy -efficient streetlights, and synchronized traffic
signals. In accordance with CEQA requirements and the CEQA review process, the City assesses the air
quality impacts of new development projects, requires mitigation of potentially significant air quality
impacts by conditioning discretionary permits, and monitors and enforces implementation of such
mitigation.
In accordance with the CEQA requirements, the City does not, however, have the expertise to develop
plans, programs, procedures, and methodologies to ensure that air quality within the City and region
will meet federal and state standards. Instead, the City relies on the expertise of the SCAQMD and
utilizes the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook as the guidance document for the environmental review of plans
and development proposals within its jurisdiction.
The City of La Quinta General Plan (La Quinta General Plan), adopted February 19, 2013, provides the
following air quality -related goals and policies that are applicable to the proposed project.
GOAL AQ-1: A reduction in all air emissions generated within the City.
Policy AQ-1.1: Coordinate with the South Coast Air Quality Management District to assure
compliance with air quality standards.
Policy AQ-1.2: Work to reduce emissions from residential and commercial energy use by
encouraging decreased consumption and increased efficiency.
Policy AQ-1.3: Work to reduce emissions from mobile sources by encouraging a decrease in the
number of vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled.
Policy AQ-1.4: Protect people and sites that are especially sensitive to airborne pollutants
(sensitive receptors) from polluting point sources.
Policy AQ-1.5: Ensure all construction activities minimize emissions of all air pollutants.
Policy AQ-1.6: Proposed development air quality emissions of criteria pollutants shall be analyzed
under CEQA.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-9
Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Air Quality Impact Threshold of Significance
Regional Air Quality Impacts. SCAQMD has developed significance thresholds based on the volume of
pollution emitted rather than on actual ambient air quality because the direct air quality impact of a
project is not quantifiable on a regional scale. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that any project in
the Coachella Valley portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin with daily emissions that exceed any of the
identified significance thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively
significant air quality impact. For the purposes to this air quality impact analysis, a regional air quality
impact would be considered significant if emissions exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds
identified in Table 4.3-3, SCAQMD Regional Criteria Pollutant Emission Thresholds of Significance.
Table 4.3-3
SCAQMD Regional Criteria Pollutant Emission Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)'
Activity
VOC
NOx
CO
Sox
PM10
PM2.5
Lead
Construction 75
100
550
150
150
55
3
Operation 75
100
550
150
150
55
3
Notes:
1 The SCAQMD operational thresholds for the Coachella Valley are the same as the construction thresholds.
Source: Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis; October 28, 2021.
Local Air Quality Impacts. In order to assess local air quality impacts the SCAQMD has developed
Localized Significant Thresholds (LSTs) to assess the project -related air emissions in the project vicinity.
SCAQMD has also provided Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (LST Methodology),
July 2008, which details the methodology to analyze local air emission impacts. The LST Methodology
found that the primary emissions of concern are NO2, CO, PM1o, and PM2.5.
The LST Methodology provides Look -Up Tables with different thresholds based on the location and
size of the project site and distance to the nearest sensitive receptors. As detailed above, the project
site is located in Monitoring Area 30, which covers the Coachella Valley. The Look -Up Tables provided
in the LST Methodology include project site acreage sizes of 1-acre, 2-acres and 5-acres. The 5-acre
project site values in the Look -Up Tables have been utilized in this analysis since that is the nearest size
available for the 9.7-acre project site.
The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a home at 58300 Almonte Drive that is located as
near as 12 feet (3.7 meters) west of the project site. According to LST Methodology, any receptor
located closer than 25 meters (82 feet) shall be based on the 25-meter thresholds. Table 4.3-4,
SCAQMD Local Air Quality Thresholds of Significance, shows the LSTs for NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 for both
construction and operational activities.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-10 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.3-4
SCAQMD Local Air Quality Thresholds of Significance
Allowable Emissions (pounds/day)'
Activity
NOx
co
PMio
P
Construction
304
2,292
14
8
Operation
304
2,292
4
2
Notes:
1 The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a single-family home located as near as 12 feet (3.7 meters) west of the
project site. According to SCAQMD methodology, all receptors closer than 25 meters are based on the 25-meter threshold.
Source: Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis; October 7, 2021.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase the population on the
project site above what is currently projected for the project site, which would increase long-term
operational air emissions above what was estimated in the City's General Plan. The air quality analysis
prepared for the proposed project considered and evaluated the incremental increase of operational
air quality emissions associated with increased population on the project site and determined that air
quality impacts would be less than significant. Potential air quality impacts associated with the General
Plan Amendment and Zone Change would be less than significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of an
applicable air quality plan. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a discussion of
any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable General Plans and regional plans
(CEQA Guidelines Section 15125). The regional plan that applies to the proposed project includes the
SCAQMD AQMP. Therefore, this section discusses any potential inconsistencies of the proposed
project with the AQMP.
The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that "New or amended GP 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 is usually not required. A proposed
project should be considered consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does
not obstruct other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook identifies two key indicators of consistency
and both are evaluated below.
(1) 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 or increments based on the
year of project buildout and phase.
Public Review Draft I June 2023
4.3-11
Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
CRITERIA 1: INCREASE FREQUENCY OR SEVERITY OF VIOLATIONS
Based on the air quality modeling analysis contained in this report, short-term regional construction
air emissions would not result in significant impacts based on SCAQMD regional thresholds of
significance or local thresholds of significance. The ongoing operation of the proposed project would
generate air pollutant emissions that are inconsequential on a regional basis and would not result in
significant impacts based on SCAQMD thresholds of significance. The analysis for long-term local air
quality impacts showed that local pollutant concentrations would not exceed the air quality standards.
Therefore, a less than significant long-term impact would occur, and no mitigation would be required.
Therefore, based on the information provided above, the proposed project would be consistent with
the first criterion.
CRITERIA 2: EXCEED ASSUMPTIONS GENERAL PLAN
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 Connect SoCal and 2019 FTIP. Connect
SoCal is a major planning document for the regional transportation and land use network within
southern California. The Connect SoCal is a long-range plan that is required by federal and state
requirements placed on SCAG and is updated every four years. The 2019 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 assumptions that are
represented in AQMP.
The project site is currently designated Low Density Residential (LDR) in the General Plan and is zoned
Low Density Residential (RL). The proposed project involves a request of approval for a General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change to Medium Density Residential, approval of a Planned Unit
Development and approval of a Tentative Tract Map to allow for the development of 80 single-family
dwelling units on a 9.7 gross acre project site. Although the proposed project is currently inconsistent
with the General Plan land use designation and zoning for the project site, the proposed project would
be in close proximity to the proposed commercial land uses located on the east side of Monroe Street
(as near as 550 feet east of the project site) which will promote a walkable community and would be
in substantial compliance with the City's Land Use Element goals and policies. Therefore, the proposed
project would not result in an inconsistency with the current land use designations with respect to the
regional forecasts utilized by the AQMPs. As such, 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. 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.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023
4.3-12
Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
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?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of 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. The SCAQMD has published a report on
how to address cumulative impacts from air pollution: White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to
Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution (http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/
Environmental-Justice/cumulative-impacts-working-group/cumulative-impacts-white-paper. pdf). In
this report, the AQMD clearly states (Page D-3):
"...the AQMD uses the same significance thresholds for project specific and cumulative impacts
for all environmental topics analyzed in an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact
Report (EIR). Projects that exceed the project -specific significance thresholds are considered by
the SCAQMD to be cumulatively considerable. This is the reason project -specific and cumulative
significance thresholds are the some. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project -
specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant."
Therefore, this analysis assumes that individual projects that do not generate operational or
construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds for project -specific
impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants
for which the Basin is in nonattainment and, therefore, would not be considered to have a significant,
adverse air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project -related construction and operational
emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project -specific impacts would be considered
cumulatively considerable. The following section calculates the potential air emissions associated with
the construction and operations of the proposed project and compares the emissions to the SCAQMD
standards.
CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
The construction activities for the proposed project are anticipated to include site preparation and
grading of the 9.7-acre project site, building construction of the 80 single-family homes, paving of the
onsite roads and road improvements to Avenue 58 and application of architectural coatings. The
construction emissions have been analyzed for both regional and local air quality impacts.
Regional Air Quality Construction Impacts
The CaIEEMod model has been utilized to calculate the construction -related regional emissions from
the proposed project. The worst -case summer or winter daily construction -related criteria pollutant
emissions from the proposed project for each phase of construction activities are shown in Table 4.3-
5, Construction -Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions. Since it is possible that building
construction, paving, and architectural coating activities may occur concurrently towards the end of
the building construction phase, Table 4.3-5 also shows the combined regional criteria pollutant
emissions from building construction (year 2023), paving and architectural coating phases of
construction.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-13 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.3-5
Construction -Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Activity
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
VOC
NO,
CO
SO,
PM10
PM2.5
Site Preparation (Year 2022)1
Onsite2
3.17
33.08
19.70
0.04
10.46
6.03
Offsite3
0.07
0.26
0.64
<0.00
0.18
0.05
Total
3.24
33.34
20.34
0.04
10.64
6.08
Grading (Year 2022)1
Onsite2
1.95
20.86
15.27
0.03
4.21
2.42
Offsite3
0.66
25.65
5.97
0.11
3.74
1.22
Total
2.61
46.51
21.24
0.14
7.95
3.64
Building Construction (Year 2022)
Onsite
1.71
15.62
16.36
0.03
0.81
0.76
Offsite
0.41
1.66
3.78
0.01
1.09
0.31
Total
2.12
17.28
20.14
0.04
1.90
1.07
Combined Year 2023 Building Construction, Paving, and Architectural Coatings
Onsite
68.54
25.88
32.64
0.05
1.28
1.20
Offsite
0.48
1.40
4.52
0.02
1.38
0.38
Total
69.02
27.28
37.16
0.07
2.66
1.58
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions
69.02
46.51
37.16
0.14
10.64
6.08
SCAQMD Thresholds
75
100
550
150
150
55
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Notes:
1 Site Preparation and Grading based on adherence to fugitive dust suppression requirements from SCAQMD Rule 403.
z Onsite emissions from equipment not operated on public roads.
3 Offsite emissions from vehicles operating on public roads.
Source: Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis; October 28, 2021.
Table 4.3-5 shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the regional emissions
thresholds during either site preparation, grading, or the combined building construction, paving and
architectural coatings phases. Therefore, a less than significant regional air quality impact would occur
from construction of the proposed project.
Local Air Quality Construction Impacts
Construction -related air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality
standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough
to create a regional impact to the Air Basin. The local air quality emissions from construction were
analyzed through utilizing the methodology described in Localized Significance Threshold Methodology
(LST Methodology), prepared by SCAQMD, revised October 2009. The LST Methodology found the
primary criteria pollutant emissions of concern are NOx, CO, PM1o, and PM2.5. To determine if any of
these pollutants require a detailed analysis of the local air quality impacts, each phase of construction
was screened using the SCAQMD's Mass Rate LST Look -up Tables. The Look -up Tables were developed
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-14
Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
by the SCAQMD to readily determine if the daily onsite emissions of CO, NOx, PM1o, and PM2.5 from
the proposed project could result in a significant impact to the local air quality.
Table 4.3-6, Construction -Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions, shows the onsite emissions from
the CaIEEMod model for the different construction phases and the calculated localized emissions
thresholds. Since it is possible that building construction, paving, and architectural coating activities
could occur concurrently towards the end of the building construction phase, Table 4.3-6 also shows
the combined local criteria pollutant emissions from year 2023 building construction, paving and
architectural coating phases of construction.
Table 4.3-6
Construction -Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Emissions (pounds/day)'
Construction Phas7ePollutant
Construction Phase
WNCIX
CO
PMso
PM-)
Site Preparation
33.12
19.78
10.48
6.04
Grading2
24.06
16.02
4.68
2.57
Building Construction (Year 2022)
15.82
16.83
0.95
0.80
Combined Building Construction (Year 2023), Paving and
Architectural Coatings
27.32
33.36
1.56
1.35
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions
33.12
33.36
10.48
6.04
SCAQMD Local Construction Thresholds'
304
2,292
14
8
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
Notes:
1 The Pollutant Emissions include 100% of the onsite emissions (off -road equipment and fugitive dust) and 1/8 of the offsite
emissions (on road trucks and worker vehicles), in order to account for the on -road emissions that occur within a 1/4 mile
of the project site.
z Site Preparation and Grading phases based on adherence to fugitive dust suppression requirements from SCAQMD Rule 403.
3 The nearest offsite sensitive receptor to the project site is a single-family home located as near as 12 feet (3.7 meters) west
of the project site. According to SCAQMD methodology, all receptors closer than 25 meters are based on the 25-meter
threshold.
Calculated from SCAQMD's Mass Rate Look -up Tables for five acres in Air Monitoring Area 30, Coachella Valley.
Source: Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis October 28, 2021.
The data provided in Table 4.3-6 shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the
local emissions thresholds during either site preparation, grading, or the combined building
construction, paving, and architectural coatings phases. Therefore, a less than significant local air
quality impact would occur from construction of the proposed project.
OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
The on -going operation of the proposed project would result in a long-term increase in air quality
emissions. This increase would be due to emissions from the project -generated vehicle trips, emissions
from energy usage, onsite area source emissions, and off -road equipment created from the on -going
use of the proposed project. The following section provides an analysis of potential long-term air
quality impacts due to regional air quality and local air quality impacts with the on -going operations of
the proposed project.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-15
Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Operations -Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Analysis
The operations -related regional criteria air quality impacts created bythe proposed project have been
analyzed through use of the CaIEEMod model. The worst -case summer or winter VOC, NOx, CO, S02,
PM1o, and PM2.5 daily emissions created from the proposed project's long-term operations have been
calculated and are summarized in Table 4.3-7, Operational Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions.
Table 4.3-7
Operational Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
c ivi
VOC
NOY
CO
PMio
Area Sources'
5.46
0.08
6.77
<0.00
0.04
0.04
Energy Usage'
0.06
0.55
0.24
<0.00
0.04
0.04
Mobile Sources3
2.18
2.58
17.63
0.04
3.69
1.00
Total Emissions
7.70
1 3.21
1 24.64
1 0.04
3.77
1.08
SCAQMD Operational Thresholds4
75
100
550
150
150
55
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Notes:
1 Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment.
z Energy usage consists of emissions from natural gas usage.
3 Mobile sources consist of emissions from vehicles and road dust.
4 The SCAQMD operational thresholds for the Coachella Valley are the same as the construction thresholds.
Source: Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis; October 28, 2021.
The data provided in Table 4.3-6 shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed the
regional emissions thresholds. Therefore, a less than significant regional air quality impact would occur
from the operation of the proposed project.
This analysis also evaluates the proposed project's localized impact to air quality for emissions of CO,
NOx, PM1o, and PM2.5 by comparing the proposed project's onsite emissions to the SCAQMD's
applicable LST thresholds. As evaluated in this analysis, the proposed project would not result in
emissions that exceeded the SCAQMD's LSTs. Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected
to exceed the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards for emissions of
CO, NOx, PM1o, and PM2.5.
Operations -Related Local Air Quality Impacts
Project -related air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and Federal air quality
standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough
to create a regional impact to the Air Basin. The proposed project has been analyzed for the potential
local CO emission impacts from the project -generated vehicular trips and from the potential local air
quality impacts from onsite operations. The following analyzes the vehicular CO emissions and local
impacts from onsite operations.
Local CO Hotspot Impacts from Project -Generated Vehicular Trips
CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor
vehicles. For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by
a roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential local air quality impacts. Local air quality
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-16 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
impacts can be assessed by comparing future without and with project CO levels to the State and
Federal CO standards of 20 ppm over one hour or 9 ppm over eight hours.
At the time of the 1993 Handbook, the Air Basin was designated nonattainment under the CAAQS and
NAAQS for CO. With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation
of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the Air Basin and in the state have
steadily declined. In 2007, the Air Basin was designated in attainment for CO under both the CAAQS
and NAAQS. SCAQMD conducted a CO Hotspot analysis for attainment at the busiest intersections in
Los Angeles during the peak morning and afternoon periods and did not predict a violation of CO
standards.' Since the nearby intersections to the proposed project are much smaller with less traffic
than what was analyzed by the SCAQMD, no local CO Hotspots are anticipated to be created from the
proposed project and no CO Hotspot modeling was performed. Therefore, a less than significant long-
term air quality impact is anticipated to local air quality with the on -going use of the proposed project.
Local Criteria Pollutant Impacts from Onsite Operations
Project -related air emissions from onsite sources such as architectural coatings, landscaping
equipment, and onsite usage of natural gas appliances may have the potential to create emissions
areas that exceed the State and Federal air quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these
pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the SSAB.
The local air quality emissions from onsite operations were analyzed using the SCAQMD's Mass Rate
LST Look -up Tables and the methodology described in LST Methodology. The Look -up Tables were
developed by the SCAQMD to readily determine if the daily emissions of CO, NOx, PM1o, and PMZ.s
from the proposed project could result in a significant impact to the local air quality. Table 4.3-8,
Operations -Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions, shows the onsite emissions from the CalEEMod
model that includes area sources, energy usage, onsite off -road equipment, and vehicles operating in
the immediate vicinity of the project site and the calculated emissions thresholds.
Table 4.3-8
Operations -Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Onsite Emission Source
NOx
CO
PM10
PM1.s
Area Sources
0.08
6.77
0.04
0.04
Energy Usage
0.55
0.24
0.04
0.04
Mobile Sources'
0.06
0.44
0.09
0.03
Total Emissions
0.69
7.45
0.17
0.11
SCAQMD Local Operational Thresholds
304
1 2,292
1 4
1 2
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
Notes:
1 Mobile sources based on 1/8 of the gross vehicular emissions, which is the estimated portion of vehicle emissions occurring
within a quarter mile of the project site.
z The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a single-family home located as near as 12 feet (3.7 meters) west of the
project site. According to SCAQMD methodology, all receptors closer than 25 meters are based on the 25-meter threshold.
Source: Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis October 28, 2021.
1 The four intersections analyzed by the SCAQMD were: Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway; Wilshire Boulevard and
Veteran Avenue; Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue; and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard. The busiest
intersection evaluated (Wilshire and Veteran) had a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day with LOS E in
the morning and LOS F in the evening peak hour.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-17 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The data provided in Table 4.3-8 shows that the on -going operations of the proposed project would
not exceed the local NOx, CO, PM1o, and PM2.s thresholds of significance. Therefore, the on -going
operations of the proposed project would create a less than significant operations -related impact to
local air quality due to onsite emissions and no mitigation would be required.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The local concentrations of criteria pollutant
emissions produced in the nearby vicinity of the proposed project, which could expose sensitive
receptors to substantial concentrations have been calculated for both construction and operations,
which are discussed separately below. The discussion below also includes an analysis of the potential
impacts from local criteria pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions. The nearest sensitive
receptor is a home at 58300 Almonte Drive that is located as near as 12 feet west of the project site.
CONSTRUCTION -RELATED SENSITIVE RECEPTOR IMPACTS
Construction activities could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of
localized criteria pollutant concentrations and from toxic air contaminant emissions created from
onsite construction equipment, which are described below.
Local Criteria Pollutant Impacts from Construction
The local air quality impacts from construction of the proposed project have been analyzed and found
that the construction of the proposed project would not exceed the local NOx, CO, PM1o, and PM2.5
thresholds of significance. Therefore, construction of the proposed project would create a less than
significant construction -related impact to local air quality and no mitigation would be required.
Toxic Air Contaminants Impacts from Construction
According to the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, any project that has the potential to expose the public to
toxic air contaminants in excess of the following thresholds would be considered to have a significant
air quality impact:
• If the Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk is 10 in one million or greater; or
• Toxic air contaminants from the proposed project would result in a Hazard Index increase of 1
or greater.
In order to determine if the proposed project may have a significant impact related to toxic air
contaminants (TACs), the Health Risk Assessment Guidance for analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile
Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis, (Diesel Analysis) prepared by SCAQMD,
August 2003, recommends that if the proposed project is anticipated to create TACs through stationary
sources or regular operations of diesel trucks on the project site, then the proximity of the nearest
receptors to the source of the TAC and the toxicity of the hazardous air pollutant (HAP) should be
analyzed through a comprehensive facility -wide health risk assessment (HRA).
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-18 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The greatest potential for toxic air contaminante missions would be related to diesel particulate matter
(DPM) emissions associated with heavy equipment operations during construction of the proposed
project. According to SCAQMD methodology, health effects from carcinogenic air toxics are usually
described in terms of "individual cancer risk." "Individual Cancer Risk" is the likelihood that a person
exposed to concentrations of toxic air contaminants over a 70-year lifetime will contract cancer, based
on the use of standard risk -assessment methodology. It should be noted that the most current cancer
risk assessment methodology recommends analyzing a 30-year exposure period for the nearby
sensitive receptors (OEHHA, 2015).
Given the relatively limited number of heavy-duty construction equipment, the varying distances that
construction equipment would operate to the nearby sensitive receptors, and the short-term
construction schedule, the proposed project would not result in a long-term (i.e., 30 or 70 years)
substantial source of toxic air contaminant emissions and corresponding individual cancer risk. In
addition, California Code of Regulations Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449 regulates
emissions from off -road diesel equipment in California. This regulation limits the idling of equipment
to no more than five minutes, requires equipment operators to label each piece of equipment and
provide annual reports to CARB of their fleet's usage and emissions. This regulation also requires
systematic upgrading of the emission Tier level of each fleet, and currently no commercial operator is
allowed to purchase Tier 0 or Tier 1 equipment. By January 2023, no commercial operator is allowed
to purchase Tier 2 equipment. In addition to the purchase restrictions, equipment operators need to
meet fleet average emissions targets that become more stringent each year between years 2014 and
2023. Therefore, due to the limitations in off -road construction equipment DPM emissions from
implementation of Section 2448, a less than significant short-term toxic air contaminant impact would
occur during construction of the proposed project. As such, construction of the proposed project
would result in a less than significant exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations.
OPERATIONS -RELATED SENSITIVE RECEPTOR IMPACTS
The on -going operations of the proposed project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations of local CO emission impacts from the project -generated vehicular trips and
from the potential local air quality impacts from onsite operations. The following analyzes the vehicular
CO emissions, local criteria pollutant impacts from onsite operations, and toxic air contaminant
impacts.
Local CO Hotspot Impacts from Project -Generated Vehicle Trips
CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor
vehicles. For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by
a roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential impacts to sensitive receptors. The
analysis provided above shows that no local CO Hotspots are anticipated to be created at any nearby
intersections from the vehicle traffic generated by the proposed project. Therefore, operation of the
proposed project would result in a less than significant exposure of offsite sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations and no mitigation would be required.
Local Criteria Pollutant Impacts from Onsite Operations
The local air quality impacts from the operation of the proposed project would occur from onsite
sources such as architectural coatings, landscaping equipment, and onsite usage of natural gas
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-19 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
appliances. The analysis provided above found that the operation of the proposed project would not
exceed the local NOx, CO, PM1o, and PM2.s thresholds of significance. Therefore, the on -going
operations of the proposed project would create a less than significant operations -related impact to
local air quality due to onsite emissions and no mitigation would be required.
Operations -Related Toxic Air Contaminant Impacts
Particulate matter (PM) from diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in most areas and according to
The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality 2013 Edition, prepared by CARE, about 80% of the
outdoor TAC cancer risk is from diesel exhaust. Some chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and
formaldehyde have been listed as carcinogens by State Proposition 65 and the Federal Hazardous Air
Pollutants program. Due to the nominal number of diesel truck trips that are anticipated to be
generated by the on -going operation of the proposed residential project, a less than significant TAC
impact would occur during the on -going operations of the proposed project and no mitigation would
be required.
Therefore, operation of the proposed project would result in a less than significant exposure of
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the project would not result in other emissions
(such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. Individual
responses to odors are highly variable and can result in a variety of effects. Generally, the impact of an
odor results from a variety of factors such as frequency, duration, offensiveness, location, and sensory
perception. The frequency is a measure of how often an individual is exposed to an odor in the ambient
environment. The intensity refers to an individual's or group's perception of the odor strength or
concentration. The duration of an odor refers to the elapsed time over which an odor is experienced.
The offensiveness of the odor is the subjective rating of the pleasantness or unpleasantness of an odor.
The location accounts for the type of area in which a potentially affected person lives, works, or visits;
the type of activity in which he or she is engaged; and the sensitivity of the impacted receptor.
Sensory perception has four major components: detectability, intensity, character, and hedonic tone.
The detection (or threshold) of an odor is based on a panel of responses to the odor. There are two
types of thresholds: the odor detection threshold and the recognition threshold. The detection
threshold is the lowest concentration of an odorthat will elicit a response in a percentage of the people
that live and work in the immediate vicinity of the project site and is typically presented as the mean
(or 50% of the population). The recognition threshold is the minimum concentration that is recognized
as having a characteristic odor quality and this is typically represented by recognition by 50% of the
population. The intensity refers to the perceived strength of the odor. The odor character is what the
substance smells like. The hedonic tone is a judgment of the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the
odor. The hedonic tone varies in subjective experience, frequency, odor character, odor intensity, and
duration. Potential odor impacts have been analyzed separately for construction and operations
below.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-20 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
CONSTRUCTION -RELATED ODOR IMPACTS
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the application of coatings
such as asphalt pavement, paints, and solvents and from emissions from diesel equipment. Standard
construction requirements that limit the time of day when construction may occur as well as SCAQMD
Rule 1108 that limits VOC content in asphalt and Rule 1113 that limits the VOC content in paints and
solvents would minimize odor impacts from construction. As such, the objectionable odors that may
be produced during the construction process would be temporary and would not likely be noticeable
for extended periods of time beyond the project site's boundaries. Through compliance with the
applicable regulations that reduce odors and due to the transitory nature of construction odors, a less
than significant odor impact would occur, and no mitigation would be required.
OPERATIONS -RELATED ODOR IMPACTS
The proposed project would consist of a residential development. Potential sources that may emit
odors during the on -going operations of the proposed project would primarily occur from the trash
storage areas. Pursuant to City regulations, permanent trash enclosures that protect trash bins from
rain as well as limit air circulation would be required for the trash storage areas. Due to the distance
of the nearest receptors from the project site and through compliance with SCAQMD's Rule 402 and
City trash storage regulations, no significant impact related to odors would occur during the on -going
operations of the proposed project. Therefore, a less than significant odor impact would occur, and no
mitigation would be required.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.3-21 Air Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.4 Biological Resources
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
❑
®
❑
❑
species in local 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 state or federally
protected wetlands (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?
The following analysis is based on a Biological Technical Report prepared by VCS Environmental in
October 2021. The report is presented in its entirety in Appendix B.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Existing Setting
The project site is currently vacant land with remnants of a former date palm (Phoenix doctylifero)
orchard. No operations are currently performed onsite. According to available historical sources, the
property was formerly undeveloped as early as 1904. A residence occupied the northeastern portion
of the subject property from circa 1928 until it was demolished in 2015. The remainder of the subject
property was developed with a date palm orchard from at least 1949 until circa 2002. Remnants of the
date palm orchard remain on the subject property. Tenants on the subject property have included
residential and farming occupants.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4-1 Biological Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The project site supports one vegetation community/land cover type, Fallow Agricultural Field; refer
to Figure 4.4-1, Vegetation/Land Cover. The site is highly disturbed and is dominated primarily by date
palm trees, non-native herbaceous forbs and grasses and remnants of the former date palm orchard.
VEGETATION COMMUNITIES
Overall, the project site is highly disturbed with remnants of date palm trees scattered throughout the
site. Herbaceous non-native grasses and forbs are present at a moderate cover and some patches of
native saltbush and arrow weed occur intermixed with other non-native species within the project site.
Table 4.4-1, Vegetation Communities, shows the vegetation/land cover mapping and acreages of the
fallow agricultural field.
Table 4.4-1
Vegetation Communities
Vegetation Community/Land Cover Type
Alk
Project Site
(acres)
Fallow Agricultural Field
9.7
Total
9.7
Source: VCS Environmental, Biological Technical Report, October 2021.
Approximately 9.7 acres of fallow agricultural field was mapped within the project site. This is not a
natural or seminatural vegetation community, therefore, the vegetation type identified within the
project site did not meet alliance membership requirements of the Manual of California Vegetation.
This vegetation community/land cover is highly disturbed and presents non-native date palm trees
scattered throughout the site. Some non-native species observed include tamarisk (Tamarix
ramosissima), bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), pigweed amaranth (Amaranthus albus), nutgrass
(Cyperus rotundus), Lamb's quarter (Chenopodium album), cheese weed (malva palviflora), Russian
thistle (Salsola tragus), fountain grass (Cenchrus setaceus), oleander (Nerium oleander) and common
purslane (Portulaca oleracea). Native species observed onsite include patches of fourwing saltbush
(Atriplex canescens), arrow weed (Pluchea sericea), burrow weed (Ambrosia dumosa), with scattered
gray desert sunflower (Helianthus petiolaris ssp. canescens) and other herbaceous species.
Special Status Vegetation Communities
The project site does not support any sensitive vegetation communities. Additionally, no sensitive
communities were reported in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California
Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) within two miles of the project.
JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
No surface water or wetlands are mapped on the project site through the online National Wetlands
Inventory (NWI). According to topographic map interpretation, groundwater flow in the vicinity of the
project is inferred to be toward the southeast. No settling ponds, lagoons, surface impoundments,
wetlands, or natural catch basins were observed on the project site (Partner 2019). The topography of
the project site and perimeters do not support jurisdictional waters or wetlands.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4-2 Biological Resources
Project Site
Vegetation/Land Cover
Fallow Agricultural Field
rR
t
� 1
i
s,�x2 ilsss s�sn
5eFTnata Or 5erenata Ord
o
* a
a
Alb.
IF
- """W
I
�n
Source: VCS Environmental; October 2021.
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
e Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Vegetation/Land Cover
VCS Environmental Figure 4.4-1
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
SENSITIVE PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES
A database search of special status plant species and wildlife species listed in the California Native
Plant Society (CNPS) Online Survey of rare Plants and the CNDDB was conducted to determine the
potential for special status plant and wildlife species to be present on the project site. A listing of
special status plant and wildlife species that have a moderate or higher potential to occur on the
project site is shown in Table 4.4-2, Special Status Species. A complete listing of all special status species
that have some potential to occur on the project site is presented in Appendix B, Biological Technical
Report, and graphically shown in Figure 4.4-2, California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB)
Occurrences.
Table 4.4-2
Special Status Species
Scientific Name
Common
Status General Habitat Description
Potential for Occurrence
Name
AL
within the Project Site
Plants
Abronia villosa
Chaparral
CRPR: 18.1
This species is found on the coastal
Low -Moderate. Project
var. aurito
sand-
side of the southern California
provides suitable sandy
verbena
mountains in chaparral and coastal
soils and somewhat bare
(also foothill
sage scrub plant communities. Sand-
areas for the species;
sand-
verbena likes sun and sandy soil.
however, the site is
verbena)
Sand -verbena has gray foliage with
highly degraded and has
pinkish purple flowers, and the
weeds; additionally, no
flowers are fragrant. It does not
washes, alluvial scrub or
tolerate weeds and needs bare
chaparral occur on the
ground. Exposed sites with sandy
project site.
soils, especially washes and dunes,
The species was not
in chaparral, sage scrub, and alluvial
observed during the
scrub.
biological surveys.
Elevation: <1600 meters
Blooming period: (Jan)March —
September
Reptiles
Uma inornata
Coachella
FT, SE
Highly specialized endemic lizard
Low. Project site lacks
Valley
CVMSHCP
that is restricted to windblown sand
suitable windblown sand
fringe -toed
- Covered
deposits (dunes) on the floor of the
dune habitat.
lizard
Species
Coachella Valley in Riverside County,
California.
Birds
Athene
burrowing
SSC
Open, dry annual or perennial
Low -Moderate. Project
cunicularia
owl
CVMSHCP
grasslands, deserts and scrublands
site lacks suitable
- Covered
characterized by low -growing
burrows; however, the
Species
vegetation. Subterranean nester,
area is in the vicinity that
dependent upon burrowing
could provide suitable
mammals, most notably, the
habitat.
California ground squirrel.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4 Biological Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Common
Potential for Occurrence
Scientific Name
Name
Status
General Habitat Description
within the Project Site
Falco mexiconus
prairie
WL
Open hills, plains, prairies, deserts.
Moderate foraging
falcon
Typically found in fairly dry open
habitat. Suitable open
country, including grassland and
desert habitat is found
desert. Also, in open country above
on the project site. The
tree line in high mountains. In
species was not
winter, often found in farmland and
observed during the
around lakes and reservoirs, and
biological surveys.
may regularly winter in some
western cities. Avoids forested
country, and usually scarce on the
immediate coast.
Mammals
Nyctinomops
Pocketed
SC
Variety of arid habitats Desert Scrub,
Moderate. Project site
femorosaccus
Free tailed
Palm Oasis, Desert Wash, roosts in
contains suitable
Bat
rocky cliffs.
foraging habitat.
Lasiurus
Western
SC
Primarily roosts in the dead fronds
Moderate. Project site
xonthinus/ega
Yellow Bat
CVMSHCP
of palms, including landscape
contains palm trees
- Covered
specimens.
suitable for foraging and
Species
roosting.
Legend:
Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA):
FE = federally listed as endangered:
FT = federally listed as threatened
California Endangered Species Act (CESA):
SE = state listed as endangered
ST = state listed as threatened
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW):
SSC = species of special concern
CE= Candidate Endangered
FP = fully protected
WL=watch list
California Rare Plant Ranks (formerly known as CNPS Lists):
CRPR 1A - California Rare Plant Rank 1A (formerly List 1A): Plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or
extinct elsewhere.
CRPR: 1B - California Rare Plant Rank 1B (formerly List 16): Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and
Elsewhere.
CRPR: 2 - California Rare Plant Rank 2 (formerly List 2): Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered
in California, But More
Common Elsewhere.
CRPR: 4 - California Rare Plant Rank 4 (formerly List 4): Plants of Limited Distribution.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Threat Ranks:
The CNPS Threat Rank is an extension added onto the California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) and designates
the level of
endangerment by a 1 to 3 ranking with 1 being the most endangered and 3 being the least endangered.
Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP):
CVMSHCP = Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Covered Species
Source: VCS Environmental, Biological Technical Report, October 2021.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4-5 Biological Resources
Source: VCS Environmental: October 2021.
e
VCS Environmental
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Occurrences
Figure 4.4-2
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
WILDLIFE MOVEMENT
Wildlife corridors link together areas of suitable habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged
terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. The fragmentation of open space areas by
urbanization creates isolated "islands" of wildlife habitat. Corridors effectively act as links between
different populations of a species. An increase in a population's genetic variability is generally
associated with an increase in a population's health.
Corridors mitigate the effects of habitat fragmentation by:
• Allowing wildlife to move between remaining habitats, which allows depleted populations to
be replenished and promotes genetic diversity;
• Providing escape routes from fire, predators, and human disturbances, thus reducing the risk
that catastrophic events (such as fires or disease) will result in population or local species
extinction; and
• Serving as travel routes for individual wildlife species as they move within their home ranges
in search of food, water, mates, and other needs (Fahrig and Merriam 1985, Simberloff and
Cox 1987, Harris and Gallagher 1989).
Wildlife movement activities usually fall into one of three movement categories:
• Dispersal (e.g., juvenile animals from natal areas, individuals extending range distributions);
Seasonal migration, and
• Movements related to home range activities (foraging for food or water, defending territories,
searching for mates, breeding areas, or cover).
The project site is bordered by residential development, open space, and agriculture areas. Because
the site is vacant land and is near open fields, it is possible the project site may play a minor role in
local wildlife dispersal and foraging. Common wildlife species including coyotes, skunks, and raccoons
may travel through the site and neighboring developed areas, but the site does not provide
connectivity between large areas of open space on a local or regional scale. The site is not within a
significant regional wildlife movement corridor and is not considered to play a role in regional wildlife
movement.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not increase impacts to biological
resources above the level of impacts identified in the existing General Plan. Potential impacts to
biological resources have been evaluated as part of the evaluation of the proposed project and would
be required to comply with regional, state, and federal laws and regulations providing for the
protection of biological resources and, where needed, would include avoidance or mitigation
measures to minimize impacts to biological resources. With compliance with local, state, and federal
laws, potential impacts to biological resources associated with the proposed General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change would be less than significant.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4-7 Biological Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project would not have a
substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified
as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or
by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The following
evaluates potential impacts to special status plants, wildlife and critical habitat areas.
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES
Development of the project site would result in the direct removal of non-native trees, herbaceous
forbs, and common ruderal plant species. Common plant species present within the project site occur
in large numbers throughout the region and their removal does not meet the significance threshold.
Based on the high levels of disturbance, low habitat quality and the lack of detection of any special
status plants during the biological and focus plant surveys, the project is not expected to impact any
special status plant species. Based on the habitat found onsite, no direct impacts are expected to occur
as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures are recommended.
SPECIAL STATUS WILDLIFE
Development of the project site would result in the disruption and removal of non-native habitat. Due
to the lack of native habitat and the level of existing disturbance from agricultural activity onsite and
within the vicinity (e.g., nearby date palm tree orchard), these impacts would not be expected to
reduce the general wildlife populations below self-sustaining levels within the region and impacts to
non -sensitive wildlife species do not meet the significance thresholds. Due to the disturbed nature of
the site, surrounding development, and through compliance with the Coachella Valley Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), impacts resulting from the project are anticipated to have a
less than significant effect on these wildlife species.
Although no sensitive wildlife species were observed within the project site during the field survey,
five wildlife species have at least moderate (or low to moderate) potential to occur including the
Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard, Prairie falcon, burrowing owl, pocketed free -tailed bat and Western
yellow bat. To avoid potential impacts to special status species, Mitigation Measures 1310-1 through
BIO-4 are recommended to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard
The CVMSHCP identifies that there is no potential for fringe -toed lizard to occur on the project site.
The site is highly disturbed because of the agricultural activities, and the potential for the project site
to support a viable population of this species is considered low.
Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owl has low to moderate potential to occur within the project site. Although no suitable
size burrows were observed within the project site, the areas in the vicinity could provide suitable
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4-8 Biological Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
habitat and due to the proximity, a pre -construction survey to determine presence/absence of the
species is recommended. This species was not detected within the project site during the general
biological survey.
The burrowing owl is covered by special survey requirements of the CVMSHCP. To avoid potential
impacts to this species, mitigation measures are proposed which include conducting a burrowing owl
survey and implementation of avoidance measures, if present. It should be noted that the burrowing
owl, although a "covered" species under the CVMSHCP, also receives protection under CDFW Fish and
Game Code (FGC) and Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), therefore, surveys and mitigation would be
required regardless of the species location within the Plan Area. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure B10-2 would ensure that potential impacts to burrowing owls would be less than significant.
Prairie Falcon
There is a low to moderate potential for prairie falcon to occur within the project site while foraging.
This species typically nests in bluffs and cliffs which are not present within the project site. Since
removal of vegetation could result in impacts to this raptor species, Mitigation Measure BIO-3 shall be
implemented to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Nesting Birds and Other Raptor Species
The project site has the potential to support various avian species and raptor nests due to the presence
of a few shrubs, ground cover, date palm trees and other ornamental trees onsite. Since removal of
vegetation could result in impacts to raptor species and nesting birds, Mitigation Measure BIO-3 shall
be implemented to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Pocketed Free -Tailed Bat, Western Yellow Bat, and Other Bat Species
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has provided bats with more protection
recently and have commented on past CEQA documents about the inadequate analysis pertaining to
bat impacts. For example, Title 14, Section 251.1 of the California Code of Regulations prohibits
harassment of nongame mammals (i.e., bats). Harassment could mean removing the habitat occupied
by the species. Additionally, the California Fish and Game Code Section 4150 and Section 86 prohibit
"take" or possession of all nongame mammals. The removal of an occupied bat roost that results in
the death of bats could be considered "take". Impacts to bat maternity colonies (i.e., native wildlife
nursery sites), could be considered potentially significant under the CEQA.
There is a moderate potential for bat species including the pocketed free -tailed and Western yellow
bat to occur within the project site. The Western yellow bat may roost in untrimmed date palm trees.
Bat surveys should be conducted prior to vegetation removal/site disturbance to confirm
presence/absence of bat species within the project site. To reduce any potential indirect and direct
impacts to bats to less than significant, avoidance and Mitigation Measures 1310-4a — 4d shall be
implemented.
CRITICAL HABITAT
The project site is not located within designated federal critical habitat. No impact to critical habitat
would occur.
Public Review Draft I June 2023
Biological Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mitigation Measures:
1310-1: CVMSCHP Mitigation Fee. The project proponent shall be required to pay the City of La
Quinta a local development mitigation fee prior to obtaining a building permit.
1310-2: A pre-construction/clearance burrowing owl survey shall be performed not more than 30
days prior to initial ground disturbance activity to map the location of suitable burrows, if
any, and to formally determine presence/absence of the species. A qualified biologist will
survey the project site and a buffer zone, 500-feet outside the project limits for burrows
that could be used by burrowing owls. If the burrow is determined to be occupied, the
burrow will be flagged, and a 160-foot diameter buffer will be established during non -
breeding season or a 250-foot diameter buffer during the breeding season. If burrows
onsite are unoccupied, construction may proceed.
If the site survey determines the presence of burrowing owl, mitigation in accordance with
the CDFW shall be implemented as follows:
• If burrowing owls are identified as being resident onsite outside the breeding
season (September 1 to February 14) they may be relocated to other sites by a
permitted biologist (permitted by CDFW), as allowed in the CDFW Staff Report on
Burrowing Owl Mitigation (March 2012).
If an active burrow is found during the breeding season, the burrow shall be treated
as a nest site and temporary fencing shall be installed at a distance from the active
burrow, to be determined by the biologist, to prevent disturbance during grading
or construction. Installation and removal of the fencing shall be done with a
biological monitor present.
Active relocation and eviction/passive relocation require the preservation and
maintenance of suitable burrowing owl habitat determined through coordination
with the Wildlife Agencies.
1310-3: Vegetation removal activities shall be conducted outside the nesting season (September 1
to February 14 for songbirds; September 1 to January 14 for raptors) to avoid potential
impacts to nesting birds.
Any construction activities that occur during the nesting season (February 15 to August 31
for songbirds; January 15 to August 31 for raptors) will require that all suitable habitats be
thoroughly surveyed for the presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist within three
days before commencement of vegetation clearing/ground disturbance activities. If any
active nests are detected, a buffer of 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300
feet of other sensitive bird nests (non -listed), and 100 feet of most common songbird nests
will be delineated, flagged, and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete. The buffer may
be modified and/or other recommendations proposed as determined appropriate by the
biological monitor to minimize impacts.
1310-4a: Prior to construction, all suitable areas within the project site shall be surveyed for the
presence of bat roosts by a qualified bat biologist. Initial surveys are recommended to be
conducted between one year to six months prior to the initiation of vegetation removal
and ground disturbing activities, ideally during the maternity season (typically March 1 to
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4-10 Biological Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
August 31), to allow time to prepare mitigation and/or exclusion plans if needed. Surveys
may entail direct inspection of the trees or nighttime surveys. If active bat roosts are
present, a qualified bat biologist shall determine the species of bats present and the type
of roost (i.e., day roost, night roost, maternity roost). If the biologist determines that the
roosting bats are not a special -status species and the roost is not being used as a maternity
roost, then the bats may be evicted from the roost by a qualified bat biologist experienced
in developing and implementing bat mitigation and exclusion plans.
• If special -status bat species or a maternity roost of any bat species is present, but
no direct removal of active roosts will occur, a qualified bat biologist shall
determine appropriate avoidance measures, which may include implementation
of a construction -free buffer around the active roost.
• If special -status bat species or a maternity roost of any bat species is present and
direct removal of habitat (roost location) will occur, then a qualified bat biologist
experienced in developing bat mitigation and exclusion plans shall develop a
mitigation plan to compensate for the lost roost site. Removal of the roost shall
only occur when the mitigation plan has been approved by the City and only when
bats are not present in the roost. The mitigation plan shall detail the methods of
excluding bats from the roost and the plans for a replacement roost in the vicinity
of the project site. The mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for approval
prior to implementation. The plan shall include: (1) a description of the species
targeted for mitigation; (2) a description of the existing roost or roost sites; (3)
methods to be used to exclude the bats if necessary; (4) methods to be used to
secure the existing roost site to prevent its reuse prior to removal; (5) the location
for a replacement roost structure; (6) design details for the construction of the
replacement roost; (7) monitoring protocols for assessing replacement roost use;
(8) a schedule for excluding bats, demolishing of the existing roost, and
construction of the replacement roost; and (9) contingency measures to be
implemented if the replacement roosts do not function as designed.
131O-4b: Pre -construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist no more than two
weeks prior to the initiation of vegetation removal and ground disturbing activities. If no
active roosts are present, then trees shall be removed within two weeks following the
survey.
131O-4c: All potential roost trees (including palm trees) shall be removed in a manner approved by
a qualified bat biologist outside the maternity season (March 15 — August 31 in the
Coachella Valley which coincides with the bird nesting season) to avoid the potential for
"take" of nonvolant (flightless) young.
Trees and snags that have been identified as confirmed or potential roost sites require a
two-step removal process and the involvement of a bat biologist to ensure that no roosting
bats are killed during this activity. Consistent with CDFW protocols this two-step removal
shall occur over two consecutive days as follows: on Day 1, branches and limbs not
containing cavities, as identified by a qualified bat biologist, will be removed. On Day 2, the
remainder of the tree may be removed without supervision by a bat biologist. The
Public Review Draft I June 2023
Biological Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
disturbance caused by limb removal, followed by an interval of one evening, will allow bats
to safely abandon the roost.
BIC-4d: All construction activity in the vicinity of an active roost shall be limited to daylight hours.
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?
No Impact: The project would not 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. The project site consists of
9.7 acres of a fallow agricultural field which is not considered a sensitive habitat by local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by CDFW or USFWS. The proposed project will not impact any native
habitats or any special status habitats. No riparian habitats exist on the project site. Therefore, no
impacts are expected to occur to any riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities as a
result of project activities.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means. No jurisdictional waters or wetlands regulated under the
CWA occur on the project site; therefore, no impacts are expected.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project would not 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. The project site may serve a function in local wildlife dispersal and foraging; however, due to the
disturbed nature of the site and the degraded habitats, the loss of foraging habitat and/or effect on
local wildlife movement would be less than significant. No long-term or significant effects to wildlife
movement are anticipated due to project implementation. Because the project site does not lie within
a CVMSHCP-designated wildlife corridor and is adjacent to residential development, the proposed
project is not anticipated to have significant impacts related to habitat fragmentation and regional
wildlife movement. As such, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would
be required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4-12 Biological Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Neqative Declaration
NESTING BIRDS
Due to the potential for onsite bird nesting, project construction could result in impacts to nesting
birds that would be in violation of the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish
and Game Code. Therefore, recommended avoidance measures, including a pre -construction nesting
bird survey to avoid impacts prior to the start of work, would be implemented. With the
implementation of 1310-3, potential impacts to migratory birds would be less than significant.
ROOSTING BATS
Due to the potential for bat species, including the pocketed free -tailed and Western yellow bat to
occur within the project site and with the potential for these species to roost in untrimmed date palms,
project construction could result in impacts to roosting bats. Therefore, recommended avoidance
measures including pre -construction bat surveys shall be implemented. With the implementation of
Mitigation Measures 1310-4a, 1310-4b, BIO-4c and 1310-4d, potential impacts to roosting bats would be
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures 1310-3, 310-4a, 1310-4b, 1310-4c and 1310-4d are required.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as
a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact: The project would not conflict with any local policy or ordinances protecting biological
resources. The City has no existing ordinance specifically protecting any tree or biological resources.
VCS conducted a Tree Inventory Survey and prepared a Tree Inventory Memorandum as part of the
biological analysis to document the trees located on the project site, which is included as Appendix D
of Appendix B, Biological Technical Report.
The Tree Inventory Survey was conducted by VCS biologists Carla Marriner and Chris Eljenholm on
September 22, 2021, and identified a total of 207 trees within the project site. Specifically, the survey
found that 188 date palms (Phoenix dactylifera), 17 Mexican fan palms (Washingtonia robusta), one
crimson bottlebrush (Callistemon citrinus), and one Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis) and are located
within the project site. The location and sizes of the trees to be removed are included in Figure 4.4-3,
Tree Inventory Map.
All the tree species identified within the project site are non-native ornamental species and are not
species that would be considered rare or threatened. The City has no local policies or ordinances that
would conflict with the removal of the trees inventoried on the project site. Additionally, the
Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner does not have any ordinances regarding the removal of
trees that would be applicable to the project site. Therefore, the project would not conflict with any
local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4-13 Biological Resources
Source: VCS Environmental; October 2021.
e
VCS Environmental
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Tree Inventory Map
Figure 4.4-3
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
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 Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: 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. The project falls within the
CVMSHCP planning area. The CVMSHCP designates 21 Conservation areas within its Planning area
which have increased protections for covered species. The project does not fall within any areas
designated as conservation areas in the CVMSHCP. Additionally, the project site consists of
vacant/disturbed land which is unlikely to support suitable habitat for species protected under the
CVMSHCP. Because the proposed project falls within the CVMSHCP planning area, it will be required
to pay a mitigation fee which will be used to ensure that future funds are available to meet the
conservation goals of the CVMSHCP. Payment of mitigation fees would ensure compliance with the
CVMSHCP and therefore impacts to covered species would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures BIO-1 is required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.4-15 Biological Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.5 Cultural Resources
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project: 6L
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource pursuant to in Section
❑
❑
®
❑
15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section
❑
®
❑
❑
15064.5?
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
❑
®
❑
❑
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
The following analysis is based on a Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment prepared by VCS
Environmental in August 2021 and a Historic Resource Analysis Report prepared by Urbana
Preservation & Planning in May 2022. The Reports are presented in Appendix C.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Background
Cultural resources include prehistoric archaeological sites, historic archaeological sites, historic
structures, and artifacts made by people in the past. Prehistoric archaeological sites are places that
contain the material remains of activities carried out by the native population of the area (Native
Americans) prior to the arrival of Europeans in southern California. Artifacts found in prehistoric sites
include flaked stone tools such as projectile points, knives, scrapers, and drills; ground stone tools such
as manos, metates, mortars, and pestles for grinding seeds and nuts; and bone tools. Historic
archaeological sites are places that contain the material remains of activities carried out by people
during the period when written records were produced after the arrival of Europeans. Historic
archaeological material usually consists of refuse, such as bottles, cans and food waste, deposited near
structure foundations. Historic structures include houses, commercial structures, industrial facilities,
and other structures and facilities more than 50 years old.
Regulatory Setting
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
CEQA requires a lead agency to determine whether a project would have a significant impact on one
or more historical resources. According to Section 15064.5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a
"historical resource" is defined as a resource listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (PRC §21084.1); a resource included in a local
register of historical resources (14 CCR §15064.5[a][2]); or any object, building, structure, site, area,
place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (14 CCR
§15064.5[a][3]).
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-1 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Section 5024.1 of the PRC, Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR), and Sections
21083.2 and 21084.1 of the CEQA Statutes were used as the basic guidelines for the cultural resources
study. PRC 5024.1 requires evaluation of historical resources to determine their eligibility for listing in
the CRHR. The purposes of the CRHR are to maintain listings of the State's historical resources and to
indicate which properties are to be protected from substantial adverse change. The criteria for listing
resources in the CRHR, which were expressly developed to be in accordance with previously
established criteria developed for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) (per the
criteria listed at 36 CFR §60.4), are stated below (PRC §5024.1).
Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency
determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering,
scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of
California may be considered a historical resource ... Generally, a resource shall be considered
by a lead agency to be "historically significant" if the resource meets the criteria for listing on
the California Register of Historical Resources including the following:
(a) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of California's history and cultural heritage; or
(b) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; or
(c) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of
construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses
high artistic values; or
(d) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Impacts that would materially impair the significance of a resource listed in or eligible for listing in the
CRHR are considered to have a significant effect on the environment. Impacts to historical resources
from the proposed project are considered significant if the project (A) demolishes or materially impairs
in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that convey its historical significance and that
justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, the California Register; (B) demolishes or materially impairs in
an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register; or (C)
demolishes or materially impairs in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that convey its
historical significance and thatjustify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register as determined
by a lead agency (§15064.5[b][2]).
Integrity and the CRHR
Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the survival of
characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance. Historical resources eligible for
listing in the California Register must meet one of the criteria of significance described above and retain
enough of their historic character or appearance to be recognizable as historical resources and to
convey the reasons for their significance.
Historical resources that have been rehabilitated or restored may be evaluated for listing. Integrity is
evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling,
and association. It must also be judged with reference to the particular criteria under which a resource
is proposed for eligibility. Alterations over time to a resource or historic changes in its use may
themselves have historical, cultural, or architectural significance.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-2 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
It is possible that historical resources may not retain sufficient integrity to meet the criteria for listing
in the National Register, but they may still be eligible for listing in the California Register. A resource
that has lost its historic character or appearance may still have sufficient integrity for the California
Register if it maintains the potential to yield significant scientific or historical information or specific
data.
CITY OF LA QUINTA HISTORIC PRESERVATION CRITERIA
City of La Quinta Municipal Code Title 7 (Ord. 536 § 2, 2016; Ord. 238 § 2, 1993; Ord. 207 § 1, 1992)
states that a historic resource may be considered and approved by City Council for inclusion in the
City's historic resources inventory based on one or more of the following:
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political,
aesthetic, engineering or architectural history.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national history.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of construction, is a
valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship or is representative of a
notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer or architect.
D. It is an archaeological, paleontological, botanical, geological, topographical, ecological or
geographical site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
E. It is a geographically definable area with a concentration of buildings, structures,
improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements
may be greater than the value of each individual improvement.
EXISTING SETTING
Cultural Pre -History
The earliest period of human occupation in North America that is widely accepted is called Period I by
Wallace (1978). It dates from approximately 12,000 to 6,000 Before Present (B.P.) This period has been
called San Dieguito, Playa, or Lake Mojave in southern California and Western Pluvial Lakes Tradition
in the Great Basin. The Western Pluvial Lakes Tradition (Bedwell 1970) corresponds to post -Pleistocene
conditions that were cooler and wetter than the present. It represents the post -Pleistocene adaptation
to big game hunting of large mammals and possibly even members of the late Pleistocene megafauna,
such as the mammoth. If gathering was also part of this early subsistence strategy, plants were
apparently not being processed with ground stone technology. It is characterized by (a) site locations
near major water sources, (b) an absence of ground stone, (c) a flaked stone industry with long
stemmed points, and (d) a stone tool kit which included large core and flake scrapers, scraper -planes,
choppers, and hammerstones (see Altschul et al. 1985:24). This early hunting tradition ended around
6,000 B.P., probably due to the advent of much warmer and drier times associated with the Altithermal
which led to a shift in subsistence strategies focused on plants and small game.
The Millingstone Horizon (Wallace 1955), or Encinitas Tradition (Warren 1968), dates from
approximately 8,000 B.P. to 1,000 B.P. This horizon marks the technological advancements of seed
grinding for flour and the beginning of the use of marine resources. Diagnostic artifacts for this
tradition include manos, metates, scraper planes, choppers, core tools, doughnut stones, discoidals,
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-3 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
and cogstones. This period includes archaeological cultures/complexes such as Pauma, La Jolla,
Topanga, Oak Grove, and Sayles (cf. Moratto 1983).
Brock (2002) reports a buried late period Millingstone site (pottery absent) in lacustrine sediments in
the City of Coachella. The site is characterized by the presence of fired clay, purportedly evidence of
waddle and daub construction, chipped stone implements (no projectile points), and fragments of
milling stone. Brock (2002a) also reports an isolated discoidal found on another property in the City of
Coachella. No other finds from this period are recorded for the Coachella Valley (Moratto 1983:149).
The Late Prehistoric Period began around 1000 B.P. and continued until historic contact in the late
1700s. On the coast, the period is characterized by three basic shifts in the economy: (a) a more land -
based collecting economy in coastal environs, (b) collection of specifically targeted shellfish resource
areas, and (c) the development of a quasi -maritime economy (True 1966). In the Salton Basin, the
cyclical filling and desiccation of Lake Cahuilla largely dictated settlement patterns. Archaeologically,
the introduction of the mortar and pestle, finer projectile points, cremations, and the introduction of
pottery around 1000 CE characterize this period throughout southern California. Archaeologically the
San Luis Rey Complex represents a termination of most of the millingstone practices in favor of greater
reliance on acorn exploitation and establishment of semi -permanent villages in centralized resource
locations (True 1966). San Luis Rey I assemblages are characterized by millingstones, bedrock mortars,
cremations and small triangular points. San Luis Rey II contains all those plus pottery, cremation urns
and, after contact, glass beads and metal knives (True et al 1974) and is also seen as an intrusive period
of "desert" traits/people from the northeast, possibly related to the desiccation of Lake Cahuilla.
Researchers believe that this cultural pattern can be linked to Shoshonean expansion into the region
and that it is probably the direct ancestor of the Luiseno culture (True 1966; True et al 1974; White
1963; Bean and Shipek 1978).
The Late Prehistoric period can be said to have ended with the Spanish colonization and establishment
of the missions. Disease and forced relocation, which reduced the populations considerably among
the coastal settlements, did much to destroy the cultural pattern established in that period (Bean and
Shipek 1978).
The retreat of Lake Cahuilla began at approximately 500 B.P. Within just a few decades the salinity of
the lake water was such that it was no longer able to be used for human consumption. The eventual
desiccation of Lake Cahuilla resulted in the emigration of human populations (proto-historic Cahuilla)
to the south and west through San Gorgonio Pass into the San Jacinto Plains (Wilke 1971; O'Connell et
al. 1974). Post lacustrine settlement patterns seem to consist of campsites or villages (located near
perennial water sources such as Morongo) and sporadic temporary activity locations.
At European contact times, the study area was within areas occupied by groups known as the Cahuilla.
The Cahuilla culture area incorporated east -central Riverside County, consisting of desert, pass (San
Gorgonio Pass) and mountain groups each affiliation describing the exploitation areas of each group.
Desert Cahuilla ranged throughout the Coachella Valley from almost El Centro to Cabezon; the Pass
Cahuilla occupied San Gorgonio Pass and the Mountain Cahuilla dominated the Santa Rosa Mountains.
The Cahuilla are linguistically comprised of a language belonging to the Cupan subgroup of the Takic
family of the Shoshonean (Uto-Aztecan) (Kroeber 1925: Plate 57; Bean 1972). The Contact period
ethnicity of the study area is clear as the modern Cahuilla reservation of Agua Caliente is nearby.
Ethnographic literature pertinent to the Cahuilla and surrounding ethnographic groups is fairly
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-4 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
extensive and has been collected since the 1800's (see Barrows 1900; Sparkman 1908; Kroeber 1925;
White 1963 and Bean 1972).
ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORDS SEARCH
A review of the records search completed by Hudlow (2019) at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at
the University of California, Riverside was completed by the author (Appendix Q. The EIC is the
designated branch of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and houses
records concerning archaeological and historic resources in Riverside, Inyo, and Mono Counties. The
records search provided data on known archaeological and built environment resources as well as
previous studies within one-half mile of the project site. Data sources consulted at the EIC included
archaeological records, Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility (DOE), and the Historic Property
Data File (HPDF) maintained by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). The HPDF contains
listings for the CRHR and/or NRHP, California Historical Landmarks (CHL), and California Points of
Historical Interest (CPHI).
The records search revealed ten surveys had been conducted within one half -mile of the survey area,
including three surveys that included the current project area (Tang, eto12003, Mason 2005, Tang and
Encarnacion 2010). The EIC lists three prehistoric archaeological sites recorded within one-half mile of
the survey area to the south. No cultural resources have been recorded within the project area.
FIELD SURVEY
During the field survey, no cultural resources were identified; however, the property was covered in
trash and thick weeds, limiting examination of the ground. A desktop study revealed that the project
site still supports the remnants of a date palm operation.
HISTORY OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA
European exploration of the Coachella Valley began in the late 18th century. The earliest reported
exploration of the Coachella Valley occurred during the Spanish occupation of California. In 1776,
Spanish explorer Juan Bautista de Anza traversed the region on one of his two expeditions during the
early colonization of California. Spanish exploration of the region continued through the 1800s, in an
effort to find a passable supply route from Mexico to the colonies in California.
For the first half of the 19th century, the Coachella Valley was intermittently utilized as an overland
route between Mexico and Alta California. Between 1821 and 1846, Mexican land grants were
established and bestowed by the Mexican government along former indigenous lands. They were
issued to people who showed the government that they could put the land to good use. Throughout
the Mexican occupation of California, over 500 land grants were made.
In 1876, the Southern Pacific Railroad was constructed through the Coachella Valley, opening the
region for settlement, as well as providing new economic opportunities and stimulating the
development of towns and communities. Railroad stations were placed along the railway, becoming
the center of new towns and the fabric of the settlement system in the area. The present-day City of
Indio, at the time known as Indian Wells, and later the towns of Thermal, Coachella, and Mecca,
developed as a result of the railroad.
By the 1880s, as homesteading in the Coachella Valley increased, the area that would become La
Quinta would not see its first homestead claims until the turn of the century. Early homesteading
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-5 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
occurred mostly around the Palm Springs area under the Desert Land Law of 1877. During the late
1890s, the first applications for government land in the La Quinta area consisted of Desert Land Entries,
Homestead Entries, and State Grants, and properties acquired through the Indemnity List.
During the 1920s, tourism became the new major industry in the Coachella Valley, transforming the
region into a winter retreat. Mirroring the development of Palm Springs, resorts, camps, hotels, and
later country clubs were constructed in La Quinta in order to cater to tourists. In the 1930s, developers
began to subdivide large parcels of land located within proximity to the La Quinta Hotel for suburban
development. In 1935, developer E. S. "Harry' Kiener purchased and subdivided an area south of the
hotel known as the La Quinta Cove. Kiener previously developed the Peter Pan Woodland Club in Big
Bear and brought his experience to the Cove project. He advertised his new community as "one to rival
Palm Springs." Residential lots were sold for $500 with fully furnished "weekend homes" and
promoted in newspaper publications as part of the winter resort club community. Modest adobe
bungalows were constructed on lots averaging approximately 50 feet by 100 feet. Streets were
constructed in a north -to -south grid pattern, and graded and oiled to control dust conditions. By 1941,
the Cove residential subdivision began to take its present-day appearance.
During the 1940s, Coachella Valley served as a military training site for almost one million soldiers. A
162,000-acre military camp known as Camp Young was established east of present-day Indio. The area
became a military testing area for lethal weapons utilized during the war. In 1942, the La Quinta Hotel
closed its doors and was requisitioned by the United States Army who used it as their headquarters.
While the hotel was not an official duty station, signs were placed forbidding all unauthorized entry. In
the early 1980s, as the development and population of the area continued to increase, so did the need
for incorporation. With a population of approximately 3,500 in 1980, residents needed additional
dedicated services to accommodate the growing population. On May 1, 1982, following two attempts
at incorporation, the City of La Quinta was incorporated as a municipality. The city was named after
the hotel that stimulated the early development of the area as a resort town. In 2002, additional
sections of land formerly belonging to the unincorporated town of Thermal were annexed to the City
of La Quinta. Today, the City is home again to a destination for therapeutic and recreational resort
opportunities with more than 20 golf courses, numerous parks, and biking and hiking trails. The City
continues to embrace its history while facilitating new development strategies.
Date Farming
Agricultural development of present-day La Quinta commenced at the turn of the twentieth century.
Despite the harsh desert environment, the area was home to numerous farming establishments. La
Quinta's climate and soil fostered the growth of exotic dates, sweet corn, Bermuda onions, and
Thompson seedless grapes, therein becoming one of the several agricultural communities in the
Coachella Valley. In the beginning of the 1900s, the region was one of many selected by the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) for experimental research purposes. Established in 1862, the
USDA's primary goals were to promote the interests of farmers and rural communities in the United
States, which at the time represented over half of the nation's population. In the late 1880s, the USDA
created a special department to locate exotic crops for farmers to grow in the United States. These
included mangos, avocados, and new varieties of citrus. As part of their task, the department studied
different environments and established experimental stations throughout the country in areas they
felt were best suited for the cultivation of a subject crop.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-6 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
In 1904, the USDA established the first of several experimental stations in the Coachella Valley. The
federal agency discovered the region's high temperatures and soil conditions were ideal for the
cultivation of dates. Between the 1910s and 1940s, date farms dotted the area and defined the cultural
landscape of the Coachella Valley. Dates were grown commercially by both farmers and ranchers and
generated the largest single source of income of crop cultivated in the region. With the Southern
Pacific Railroad located in close proximity, farmers had easy access to exporting their crops to outside
markets. Three varieties of dates were grown in the La Quinta area, the Deglet Noor, Saidy, and Thoory.
During the 1950s, date farmers faced tough competition from foreign markets. While lower in quality,
foreign sources were generally preferred due to lower prices. Iraqi dates represented the vast majority
of dates consumed by Americans. In an effort to boost the date industry, valley farmers hosted an
annual International Festival of the Dates. Business and civic leaders encouraged townspeople to
participate in the event. The Middle Eastern themed event offered camel races, a pageant, and exhibits
with a variety of dates. Over the years, as date farmers continued to struggle, farms were gradually
replaced by citrus trees and increased residential development. Today, many residential sections have
recently been built over former date farms. Although the date industry has since declined in the area
of La Quinta, it continues to make a small presence in the Coachella Valley.
Adobe Construction
During the early settlement of the Coachella Valley, the region was once dotted with hundreds of
adobe structures. Adobe construction was popular in the region due to its simplicity, low-cost, ease of
construction, and readily available materials. Adobe has a long history as one of the earliest preferred
building materials that is utilized to this day. Adobe structures are often identified by their thick load -
bearing walls with a rounded wavy -like appearance, deeply set fenestration, flat or gently sloping
roofs, and massive wood roof and ceiling beams. Since adobe construction was load bearing with low
structural strength, walls tend to be massive and are seldom two -stories in height. By the early 20th
century, cement stucco was applied to the exterior of buildings as an adobe surface coating. Adobe
structures are typically found in California, Arizona, and to a greater extent, in Texas and New Mexico.
It was applied to several historic architectural styles, including the Spanish Revival, Mission Revival,
Pueblo Revival, Mexican Hacienda, and Monterey.
Today, many of the adobe structures visible in La Quinta date from the 1920s to 1950s. Adobe
construction is often visible in residential -use properties but is also noticeable in commercial -use
properties. Adobe buildings were mostly constructed in the Spanish Colonial Revival style, but also
include the Mission Revival and Monterrey architectural style. The buildings feature red tile roofs,
adobe or stucco exteriors, walled gardens, courtyards, decorative iron work, and arcaded porches. The
most recognized adobe commercial use building constructed in the Spanish Colonial Revival style is
the La Quinta Resort and Club. Constructed in 1926, the hotel exhibited many of the character defining
features previously listed. The hotel was designed around three courtyards with twenty Spanish
Eclectic guest bungalows sited near the hotel lobby. It took more than 100,000 hand -formed adobe
bricks and 60,000 locally fired roof tiles to construct the small casitas. Within the hotel grounds, a two-
story Spanish Revival style adobe residence with characteristics in the Monterrey style was constructed
for the hotel's developer Walter H. Morgan. By the 1930s, the construction of the La Quinta Hotel
would spur the development of the area's first residential community known as the Cove. Located
south of the La Quinta Resort and Club, the Cove subdivision featured several Spanish Colonial Revival
adobe bungalows. Between 1936 and 1941, approximately 61 small adobe houses were constructed
in a similar fashion and scale to the casitas at the La Quinta Hotel. The dwellings featured a white
Public Review Draft I June 2023 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
adobe exterior, low red tiled -roofs, paned windows, and wooden lintels. The same company who had
made the tiles and bricks for the La Quinta Hotel also made the roof tiles for the casitas in the Cove.
Over the years, several of these properties have been modified through repairs, alterations, and
additions, however most of the dwellings that remain retain sufficient integrity.
Project Site History
The construction history occurring on the project site was established through previous
documentation, building permits, historic maps, and historic and current aerial photography. Based on
the historic aerials, the project site was initially improved between 1939 and 1941 with the
construction of a modest one-story vernacular adobe dwelling with characteristics in the Spanish
Colonial architectural style by an unidentified builder. The residence had an asymmetrical fapade and
an L-shaped floorplan sited on a concrete foundation. The dwelling featured thick adobe walls, a low-
pitched side gable roof topped with gravel, an interior cobblestone chimney, deeply recessed wood -
framed casement windows and aluminum double -hung windows, and a wide veranda supported by
wooden posts. The property was first delineated on a 1941 Coachella USGS Quadrangle map (1:62,500)
and was captured on a 1947 aerial photograph of the area (Earth Explorer ID# B000384630002). The
building was surrounded by several acres of date palms. Between 1953 and 1972, a small office
addition was constructed east of the existing dwelling. The addition featured a rectangular floorplan,
a stucco fagade, a low-pitched shed roof topped with gravel, and aluminum fenestration throughout.
The addition is first visible on a 1972 aerial photograph (HistoricAerials.com). In 1976, a swimming pool
was constructed north of the office addition.
Between 1996 and 2002, many of the date palms located south of the existing dwelling were removed
to allow for the addition of a horse paddock and several pole structures. The paddock is visible on a
2002 aerial photograph (HistoricAerials.com). In 2014, a permit was filed by La Quinta del Sol, LLC for
the demolition of the single-family residence and the office space addition (Permit No. BDEM2014-
0001). The permit was approved by the City of La Quinta Building and Safety Department on October
1, 2014. Today, the subject property is a vacant lot with some remnants of the former date farm.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment prepared for the project did not identify recorded cultural
resources or paleontological resources on the project site. The proposed General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change would not increase impacts to cultural or paleontological resources above the level
of impacts identified in the existing General Plan. Potential impacts to cultural resources have been
evaluated as part of the evaluation of the proposed project and would be required to comply with laws
and regulations providing for the protection of cultural and paleontological resources, including
implementing measures to minimize impacts to cultural and paleontological resources. With
compliance with laws and regulations providing for the protection of cultural and paleontological
resources and implementing measures to minimize impacts to cultural and paleontological resources,
potential impacts to cultural and paleontological resources associated with the proposed General Plan
Amendment would be less than significant.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-8 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource
pursuant to in Section 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to in Section 15064.5.
Based on the historic aerial photograph reviewed, included as part of the Historical Resource Analysis
Report prepared by Urbana Preservation and Planning for the property, the property was initially
improved between 1939 and 1941 with the construction of a modest one-story vernacular adobe
dwelling with characteristics in the Spanish Colonial architectural style by an unidentified builder.
Between 1996 and 2002, many of the date palms located south of the existing dwelling were removed
to allow for the addition of a horse paddock and several pole structures. In 2014, a permit was filed by
La Quinta del Sol, LLC for the demolition of the single-family residence and the office space addition
(Permit No. BDEM2014-0001). The permit was approved by the City of La Quinta Building and Safety
Department on October 1, 2014. The property was analyzed for historical and architectural significance
under the eligibility criteria of the Local Register and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR).
These eligibility criteria establish a threshold under which a property may be determined to meet the
definition of a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA and the local planning and development
discretionary review process and inform the local designation request. The following is an analysis of
the project eligibility.
CALIFORNIA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES (CRHR)/LOCAL REGISTER ELIGIBILITY
CRHR/Local Criterion 1/A: It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social,
economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
• The property is not eligible under CRHR/Local Register Criterion 1/A as it does not exemplify
or reflect special elements of the City's history. Constructed between 1939 and 1941, the
property is one of many associated with the date industry that defined the area of La Quinta
during the first half of the twentieth century. The subject property was not the first nor was it
the most significant date farm in the area. As such, the property was determined not eligible
under CRHR/Local Register Criterion 1/A.
CRHR/Local Criterion 2/13: It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state or national
history.
• Research does not indicate that the 81891 Avenue 58 property is associated with individuals
significant in local, state, or national history. For this reason, the subject property was
determined not eligible under CRHR/Local Register 2/B.
CRHR/Local Criterion 3/C: It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period or method of
construction, is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship or is
representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, designer or architect.
• In order to designate the property under Criterion 3/C, the subject dwelling must possess the
distinctive characteristics of an architectural style and it must not have been substantially
altered from its historic condition. Based on historical research and imagery, the subject
property was initially improved between 1939 and 1941 with the construction of a vernacular
adobe style dwelling with characteristics of the Spanish Colonial architectural style. The
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-9 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
dwelling had an asymmetrical fagade and an L-shaped floorplan sited on a concrete
foundation. The dwelling featured thick adobe walls, a low-pitched side gable roof topped with
gravel, an interior cobblestone chimney, and deeply recessed wood -framed casement
windows and aluminum double hung windows, and a wide veranda supported by wooden
posts.
The dwelling featured several Spanish Colonial style design elements. These include a
rectangular floorplan, thick stucco walls, deeply recessed fenestration, and a wide veranda
supported by wood beams. However, none of these elements would be considered distinctive.
Rather, they are typical and common. Although the dwelling (demolished in 2014) was one of
few constructed in adobe, it was constructed towards the latter end of the popularity of adobe
as a building material. For this reason, it was determined that the dwelling — had it survived —
would not have been eligible under CRHR/Local Register 3/C.
CRHR/Local Criterion 4/D: It is an archaeological, paleontological, botanical, geological, topographical,
ecological or geographical site which has the potential of yielding information of scientific value.
• Research and analysis of the subject property has not yielded information important in local,
regional, state, or national history. Further study of the property is not likely to yield important
information. The property is not eligible under CRHR/Local Register Criterion 4/D.
Local Register Criterion E: It is a geographically definable area with a concentration of buildings,
structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling and/or association, in which the collective value of the improvements may be
greater than the value of each individual improvement.
• The subject property is not in and of itself a geographically definable concentration of
buildings, structures, improvements, or objects linked historically through location, design,
setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and/or association. The property is not eligible under
Local Register Criterion E.
Integrity: Evaluation of integrity must always be grounded in an understanding of a resource's physical
features and how they relate to historic significance. To retain historic integrity, a resource will possess
several, and usually most, of the following seven aspects of integrity: location, materials, design,
setting, workmanship, feeling, and association. If it is determined that a resource is eligible for
designation because it meets one or more of the adopted designation criteria, the integrity of the
resource must be evaluated. Integrity is the ability of a resource to convey its significance. Only after
the historic significance of a resource is fully established can the issue of integrity be addressed.
• The property has not been found to be individually eligible for designation under any of the
criteria. In its former state, the residence would not have been considered significant as a
distinctive example of a vernacular Spanish Colonial Revival style dwelling. Additionally, the
dwelling had lost integrity due to substantial and recent modifications to the property. Today,
the dwelling has since been demolished and the property remains a vacant lot with some
remnants of the date farm. Further integrity analysis is not merited.
REGULATORY CONCLUSIONS
The property has been identified as not eligible for designation to or listing on the CRHR and Local
Register under all criteria. Constructed between 1939 and 1941, the property was one of many
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-10 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
constructed during the agricultural development of the City of La Quinta. The demolished dwelling was
a vernacular adobe structure with characteristics of the Spanish Colonial style that was not found to
have historical or architectural merit. Today, the property remains a vacant lot with no standing
structures. Consequently, the subject property does not meet the definition of a historic resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, nor does it meet the definition of a historic resource
pursuant to the City of La Quinta's Municipal Code Title 7 (Ord. 536 § 2, 2016; Ord. 238 § 2, 1993; Ord.
207 § 1, 1992). As a result, it was determined that the proposed project at the subject property would
not cause an adverse significant effect to a historic resource.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the proposed
project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5. As previously indicated, a record search and pedestrian survey conducted
on the project site did not identify any known archaeological resources. Three prehistoric isolates have
been recorded within one-half mile. Although the project site is not located within a general area of
sensitivity for prehistorical archaeology, the grading activities associated with construction of the
proposed project could encounter native soils and could have the potential to encounter unknown
archaeological resources. To avoid adverse impacts to archaeological resources that could be
encountered during construction, Mitigation Measure CR-1 is recommended, which requires
archaeological monitoring and Native American monitoring to occur during project excavations into
alluvial soils, and estimated to occur within near surface soils to a depth of 5 to 10 feet. With
implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1, potential impacts to unknown archaeological resources
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
CR-1: Based on the data presented, it is recommended that archaeological monitoring and
Native American monitoring (if applicable) occur during project excavations into alluvial
soils, estimated to occur within near surface soils to a depth of 5 to 10 feet. These
Mitigation Measures for the project outline the monitoring protocols.
A MMRP to mitigate potential impacts to undiscovered buried cultural resources within
the project shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Lead Agency. This program shall
include, but not be limited to, the following actions:
1) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written verification
that a certified archaeologist has been retained to implement the monitoring
program. This verification shall be presented in a letter from the project
archaeologist to the Lead Agency.
2) The project applicant shall provide Native American monitoring during grading if
the Lead Agency determines it is necessary pending results of the AB 52
Consultation process. If applicable, the Native American monitor shall work in
concert with the archaeological monitor to observe ground disturbances and
search for cultural materials. The Lead Agency shall coordinate with the consulting
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-11 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Tribe(s) to facilitate communications with the project developer/applicant so that
all parties can develop a mutually acceptable Tribal Monitoring and Treatment
Agreement which includes the scope of monitoring, scheduling of monitors from
individual consulting Tribe(s), and the course of action for inadvertent discoveries.
3) The project archaeologist, in consultation with the consulting Tribe(s), the
contractor, and the City, shall implement a Cultural Resources Management Plan
(CRMP) to address the details, timing and responsibility of all archaeological and
cultural activities that will occur on the project site. Details in the plan shall include:
a. Project grading and development scheduling.
b. The project archaeologist and the Consulting Tribes(s) shall attend the pre -
grading meeting with the City, the construction manager and all
contractors and will conduct a mandatory Cultural Resources Worker
Sensitivity Training to those in attendance. The training will include a brief
review of the cultural sensitivity of the project and the surrounding area;
what resources could potentially be identified during earthmoving
activities; the requirements of the monitoring program; the protocols that
apply in the event inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources are
identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures
until the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate
protocols.
c. The protocols and stipulations that the contractor, City, Consulting Tribe(s)
and project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural
resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource
deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resource evaluation.
4) During the original cutting of previously undisturbed deposits, the archaeological
and Tribal monitors (if applicable) shall be onsite, as determined by the consulting
archaeologist, to perform periodic inspections of the excavations. Monitoring is
recommended in younger Holocene alluvial soils, estimated to occur within near
surface soils to a depth of 5 to 10 feet. The frequency of inspections will depend
upon the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and the presence and
abundance of artifacts and features. The consulting archaeologist shall have the
authority to modify the monitoring program if the potential for cultural resources
appears to be less than anticipated.
5) Isolates and clearly non -significant deposits will be minimally documented in the
field so the monitored grading can proceed.
6) In the event that previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered, the
archaeologist shall have the authority to divert or temporarily halt ground
disturbance operations in the area of the discovery to allow for the evaluation of
potentially significant cultural resources. The archaeologist shall contact the Lead
Agency at the time of the discovery. The archaeologist, in consultation with the
lead agency, shall determine the significance of the discovered resources. The Lead
Agency must concur with the evaluation before construction activities will be
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-12
Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
allowed to resume in the affected area. For significant cultural resources, a
Research Design and Data Recovery Program to mitigate impacts shall be
implemented by the consulting archaeologist and approved by the Lead Agency
before being carried out, using professional archaeological methods. If any human
bones are discovered, the county coroner and lead agency shall be contacted. In
the event that the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the
Most Likely Descendant (as identified by the NAHC) shall be contacted in order to
determine proper treatment and disposition of the remains.
a. Before construction activities are allowed to resume in the affected area,
the artifacts shall be recovered, and features recorded using professional
archaeological methods. The project archaeologist, in consultation with
the consulting Tribe(s), shall determine the amount of material to be
recovered for an adequate artifact sample for analysis.
b. One or more of the following treatments, in order of preference, shall be
used in the event of a discovery:
Preservation -in -Place. Avoidance, or preservation -in -place,
involves leaving a resource where it was found with no
development affecting its integrity. Pursuant to Public Resources
Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of
preservation for archaeological and cultural resources.
ii. Reburial on the project site in an area not subject to future
disturbance. Reburial of a resource shall include provisions to
protect the selected reburial area from any future impacts in
perpetuity. Reburial shall not occur until all required cataloging and
basic recording have been completed, with the exception of sacred
items, burial goods and Native American human remains. Any
reburial process shall be culturally appropriate. The listing of
contents and the location of the reburial shall be included in a
confidential Phase IV Monitoring Report.
c. If Preservation -in -Place or reburial is not feasible, all cultural material
collected during the grading monitoring program shall be processed and
curated according to the current professional repository standards in a
Riverside County curation facility that meets State Resources Department
Office of Historic Preservation Guidelines for the Curation of
Archaeological Resources (OHP 1993). The collections and associated
records shall be transferred, including title and accompanied by payment
of the fees necessary for permanent curation.
7) A Phase IV Monitoring Report, documenting the field and analysis results and
interpreting the artifact and research data within the research context, shall be
completed and submitted to the satisfaction of the Lead Agency prior to the
issuance of any building permits. The report will include DPR Primary and
Archaeological Site Forms. The Phase IV report shall be filed with the City under a
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-13 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
confidential cover and not subject to a Public Records Request and a copy of the
report shall be submitted to the consulting Tribe(s).
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the project
would not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries. No
human remains or cemeteries are known to exist within or near the project site. However, there is
always the potential that subsurface construction activities associated with the proposed project could
encounter and potentially damage or destroy previously undiscovered human remains. Accordingly,
this is considered a potentially significant impact. In the event of the accidental discovery or
recognition of any human remains, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5; Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5; Public Resources Code Section 5097.94 and Section 5097.98 must be followed. With the
implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-2, potential impacts to human remains would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures:
CR-2: Project related earth disturbance has the potential to unearth previously undiscovered
human remains, resulting in a potentially significant impact. Pursuant to Section 7050.5 of
the California Health and Safety Code, if human remains are encountered during
excavation activities, all work shall halt, and the County Coroner shall be notified. The
Coroner would determine within two working days whether a cause of death investigation
is necessary. If the Coroner determines that the remains are Native American, he/she
would contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The
NAHC would then, pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code,
immediately identify the most likely descendant (MLD), who may inspect the remains and
site of discovery and make recommendations for the treatment and/or disposition of the
remains. The MLD shall make his/her recommendation within 48 hours of being granted
access to the site. The MLD's recommendation shall be followed, if feasible, and may
include scientific removal and non-destructive analysis of the human remains, preservation
in place, and deeding the remains to the MLD for treatment. If no MILD is identified, the
MILD fails to make a recommendation, or the landowner rejects the recommendation, the
landowner shall rebury the remains with appropriate dignity on the property in a location
that would not be subject to further subsurface disturbance.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.5-14 Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.6 Energy
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:]Ilk
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact
due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
El
❑
®
❑
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b. rnflict with or obstruct a state or local plan forewable
energy or energy efficiency?
The following analysis is based on an Energy Analysis prepared by Vista Environmental in October 2021.
The report is presented in its entirety in Appendix A, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact Analysis.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Regulatory Framework
The regulatory setting related to energy conservation is primarily addressed through State and County
regulations, which are discussed below.
State
CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS (CCR) TITLE 20
On November 3, 1976, the CEC adopted the Regulations for Appliance Efficiency Standards Relating to
Refrigerators, Refrigerator -Freezers and Freezers and Air Conditioners, which were the first energy -
efficiency standards for appliances. The appliance efficiency regulations have been updated several
times by the Commission and the most current version is the 2016 Appliance Efficiency Regulations,
adopted January 2017 and now includes almost all types of appliances and lamps that use electricity,
natural gas as well as plumbing fixtures. The authority for the CEC to control the energy -efficiency of
appliances is detailed in California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 20, Division 2, Chapter 4, Article 4,
Sections 1601-1609.
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 6
The CEC is also responsible for implementing the CCR Title 24, Part 6: California's Energy Efficiency
Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24 Part 6) that were first established in
1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. In 2008,
California set an energy -use reduction goal of zero -net -energy use of all new homes by 2020 and the
CEC was mandated to meet this goal through revisions to the Title 24, Part 6 regulations.
The Title 24 standards are updated on a three-year schedule and since 2008, the standards have been
incrementally moving to the 2020 goal of the zero -net -energy use. On January 1, 2020, the 2019
standards went into effect that have been designed so the average new home built in California would
now use zero -net -energy and that non-residential buildings would use about 30% less energy than the
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.6-1 Energy
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2016 standards due mainly to lighting upgrades. The 2019 standards also encourage the use of battery
storage and heat pump water heaters, require the more widespread use of LED lighting as well as
improve the building's thermal envelope through high performance attics, walls and windows. The
2019 standards also require improvements to ventilation systems by requiring highly efficient air filters
to trap hazardous air particulates as well as improvements to kitchen ventilation systems.
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 11
CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) was developed in response to
continued efforts to reduce GHG emissions associated with energy consumption. The CalGreen
Building Standards are also updated every three years and the current version is the 2019 California
Green Building Standard Code that became effective on January 1, 2020.
The CALGreen Code contains requirements for construction site selection; storm water control during
construction; construction waste reduction; indoor water use reduction; material selection; natural
resource conservation; site irrigation conservation; and more. The code provides for design options
allowing the designer to determine how best to achieve compliance for a given site or building
condition. The code also requires building commissioning, which is a process for verifying that all
building systems (e.g., heating and cooling equipment and lighting systems) are functioning at their
maximum efficiency.
The CALGreen Code provides standards for bicycle parking, carpool/vanpool/electric vehicle spaces,
light and glare reduction, grading and paving, energy efficient appliances, renewable energy,
graywater systems, water efficient plumbing fixtures, recycling and recycled materials, pollutant
controls (including moisture control and indoor air quality), acoustical controls, storm water
management, building design, insulation, flooring, and framing, among others. Implementation of the
CALGreen Code measures reduces energy consumption and vehicle trips and encourages the use of
alternative -fuel vehicles, which reduces pollutant emissions.
Some of the notable changes in the 2019 CALGreen Code over the prior 2016 CALGreen Code include:
an alignment of building code engineering requirements with the national standards that include
anchorage requirements for solar panels, provides design requirements for buildings in tsunami zones,
increases Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) for air filters from 8 to 13, increases electric
vehicle charging requirements in parking areas, and sets minimum requirements for use of shade
trees.
Local
CITY OF LA QUINTA
The La Quinta General Plan (City of La Quinta, 2013) provides the following energy -related goals and
policies that are applicable to the proposed project.
Goal EM-1: The sustainable use of management of energy and mineral resources.
Policy EM-1.1: Strongly encourage conservation of energy resources.
Policy EM-1.2: Support the use of alternative energy and the conversion of traditional energy
sources to alternative energy.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.6-2 Energy
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Threshold of Significance
The CEQA Checklist includes an Energy Section that analyzes the proposed project's energy
consumption to avoid or reduce inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy. Since
the Energy Section was just added, no state or local agencies have adopted specific criteria or
thresholds to be utilized in an energy impact analysis. However, the 2018 Guidelines for the
Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, provide the following direction on how to
analyze a project's energy consumption:
"If analysis of the project's energy use reveals that the project may result in significant
environmental effects due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy, or wasteful
use of energy resources, the EIR shall mitigate that energy use. This analysis should include the
project's energy use for all project phases and components, including transportation -related
energy, during construction and operation. In addition to building code compliance, other
relevant considerations may include, among others, the project's size, location, orientation,
equipment use and any renewable energy features that could be incorporated into the project.
This analysis is subject to the rule of reason and shall focus on energy use that is caused by the
project. This analysis may be included in related analyses of air quality, greenhouse gas
emissions, transportation or utilities in the discretion of the lead agency."
If the proposed project creates inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy during
construction or operation activities or conflicts with a state or local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency, then the proposed project would create a significant energy impact.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase the population on the
project site above the level identified in the existing General Plan which would increase long-term
energy consumption for electricity and natural gas above what is currently estimated in the existing
General Plan. The energy analysis prepared for the proposed project considered and evaluated the
incremental increase of energy demands associated with increased population on the project site and
determined that energy impacts for the project and associated with the proposed General Plan and
Zone Change would be less than significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or
operation?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a
potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy resources, during project construction or operation. The proposed project would impact
energy resources during construction and operation. Energy resources that would be potentially
impacted include electricity, natural gas, and petroleum -based fuel supplies and distribution systems.
This analysis includes a discussion of the potential energy impacts of the proposed project, with
emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.6-3 Energy
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
CONSTRUCTION ENERGY CONSUMPTION
The construction activities for the proposed project area nticipated to include demolition and grading
of the project site, building construction and application of architectural coatings and paving of the
proposed parking lot and onsite roads. The proposed project would also consume energy resources
during construction in three (3) general forms:
1) Petroleum -based fuels used to power off -road construction vehicles and equipment on the
project site, construction worker travel to and from the project site, as well as delivery and
haul truck trips (e.g., hauling of demolition material to offsite reuse and disposal facilities).
2) Electricity associated with the conveyance of water that would be used during project
construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any necessary
lighting during construction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities
necessitating electrical power.
3) Energy used in the production of construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes,
and manufactured or processed materials such as lumber and glass.
CONSTRUCTION -RELATED ELECTRICITY
During construction, the proposed project would consume electricity to construct the new structures
and infrastructure. Electricity would be supplied to the project site by Imperial Irrigation District and
would be obtained from the existing electrical lines in the vicinity of the project site. The use of
electricity from existing power lines rather than temporary diesel or gasoline powered generators
would minimize impacts on fuel consumption. Electricity consumed during project construction would
vary throughout the construction period based on the construction activities being performed. Various
construction activities include electricity associated with the conveyance of water that would be used
during project construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any
necessary lighting during construction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities
necessitating electrical power. Such electricity demand would be temporary, nominal, and would
cease upon the completion of construction. Overall, construction activities associated with the
proposed project would require limited electricity consumption that would not be expected to have
an adverse impact on available electricity supplies and infrastructure. Therefore, the use of electricity
during project construction would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.
Since there are currently power lines in the vicinity of the project site, it is anticipated that only a few
improvements would be required to Imperial Irrigation District distribution lines and equipment with
development of the proposed project. Compliance with the City's guidelines and requirements would
ensure that the proposed project fulfills its responsibilities relative to infrastructure installation,
coordinate any electrical infrastructure removals or relocations, and limit any impacts associated with
construction of the project. Construction of the project's electrical infrastructure would not be
anticipated to adversely affect the electrical infrastructure serving the surrounding uses or utility
system capacity.
Construction -Related Natural Gas
Construction of the proposed project typically would not involve the consumption of natural gas.
Natural gas would not be supplied to support construction activities, thus there would be no demand
generated by construction. Since there is currently natural gas service in the vicinity of the project site,
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.6-4 Energy
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
construction of the proposed project would be limited to installation of new natural gas connections
within the project site. Development of the proposed project would likely not require extensive
infrastructure improvements to serve the project site. Construction -related energy usage impacts
associated with the installation of natural gas connections are expected to be confined to trenching to
place the lines below the surface. In addition, prior to ground disturbance, the proposed project would
notify and coordinate with SoCalGas to identify the locations and depth of all existing gas lines and
avoid disruption of gas service. Therefore, construction -related impacts to natural gas supply and
infrastructure would be less than significant.
Construction -Related Petroleum Fuel Use
Petroleum -based fuel usage represents the highest amount of transportation energy potentially
consumed during construction, which would be utilized by both off -road equipment operating on the
project site, on -road vehicles transporting workers to and from the project site, and on -road trucks
transporting equipment and supplies to the project site.
The off -road construction equipment fuel usage was calculated through use of the off -road equipment
assumptions and fuel use assumptions, which found that the off -road equipment utilized during
construction of the proposed project would consume 45,237 gallons of fuel. The on -road construction
trips fuel usage was calculated through use of the construction vehicle trip assumptions and fuel use
assumptions, which found that the on -road trips generated from construction of the proposed project
would consume 27,905 gallons of fuel. As such, the combined fuel used from off -road construction
equipment and on -road construction trips for the proposed project would result in the consumption
of 73,142 gallons of petroleum fuel. This equates to 0.006% of the gasoline and diesel consumed
annually in Riverside County. As such, the construction -related petroleum use would be nominal, when
compared to current county -wide petroleum usage rates.
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would be required to adhere to all State
and SCAQMD regulations for off -road equipment and on -road trucks, which provide minimum fuel
efficiency standards. As such, construction activities for the proposed project would not result in the
wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Impacts regarding
transportation energy would be less than significant. Development of the project would not result in
the need to manufacture construction materials or create new building material facilities specifically
to supply the proposed project. It is difficult to measure the energy used in the production of
construction materials such as asphalt, steel, and concrete. It is reasonable to assume that the
production of building materials such as concrete, steel, etc., would employ all reasonable energy
conservation practices in the interest of minimizing the cost of doing business.
OPERATIONAL ENERGY
The on -going operation of the proposed project would require the use of energy resources for multiple
purposes including, but not limited to, heating/ventilating/air conditioning (HVAC), refrigeration,
lighting, appliances, and electronics. Energy would also be consumed during operations related to
water usage, solid waste disposal, landscape equipment and vehicle trips.
Operations -Related Electricity
Operation of the proposed project would result in consumption of electricity at the project site. The
proposed project would consume 158,109 kilowatt-hours per year of electricity. This equates to
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.6-5 Energy
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
0.0047% of the electricity consumed annually by Imperial Irrigation District. As such, the operations -
related electricity use would be nominal, when compared to current electricity usage rates in the
Imperial Irrigation District service area.
It should be noted that the proposed project would be required to meet the 2019 Title 24, Part 6
building energy efficiency standards that have been developed to meet the State's goal of zero -net -
energy use for new homes. The zero net energy use would be achieved through a variety of measures
to make new homes more energy efficient and also requiring installation of photovoltaic systems of
adequate size to generate enough electricity to meet the zero -net energy use standard. The size of the
PV system required for the project pursuant to the 2019 Title 24, requires the proposed project to
install at least 203 Kilowatts of photovoltaic panels within the proposed project. Although, the
CalEEMod model found that with implementation of the 2019 Title 24 Part 6 standards, the proposed
project would continue to utilize a nominal amount of power. It should be noted that the electricity
usage and emission rates utilized by the CaIEEMod model are based on regional average usage rates
for existing homes, which were not all built to the most current Title 24 Part 6, standards. The
CalEEMod model provides a conservative or worst -case analysis of electricity use from the proposed
project. Therefore, it is anticipated the proposed project would be designed and built to minimize
electricity use and that existing and planned electricity capacity and electricity supplies would be
sufficient to support the proposed project's electricity demand. Thus, impacts to electrical supply and
infrastructure capacity would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.
Operations -Related Natural Gas
Operation of the proposed project would result in increased consumption of natural gas at the project
site. The proposed project would consume 2,192 MBTU per year of natural gas. This equates to
0.0048% of the natural gas consumed annually in Riverside County. As such, the operations -related
natural gas use would be nominal, when compared to current natural gas usage rates in the County.
It should be noted that, the proposed project would comply with all Federal, State, and City
requirements related to the consumption of natural gas, that includes CCR Title 24, Part 6 Building
Energy Efficiency Standards and CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards. The CCR
Title 24, Part 6 and Part 11 standards require numerous energy efficiency measures to be incorporated
into the proposed structures, including enhanced insulation as well as use of efficient natural gas
appliances and HVAC units. Therefore, it is anticipated the proposed project would be designed and
built to minimize natural gas use and that existing and planned natural gas capacity and natural gas
supplies would be sufficient to support the proposed project's natural gas demand. Thus, impacts to
natural gas supply and infrastructure capacity would be less than significant and no mitigation
measures would be required.
Operations -Related Vehicular Petroleum Fuel Usage
Operation of the proposed project would result in increased consumption of petroleum -based fuels
related to vehicular travel to and from the project site. The proposed project would consume 67,006
gallons of petroleum fuel per year from vehicle travel. This equates to 0.0055% of the gasoline and
diesel consumed annually in Riverside County. As such, the operations -related petroleum use would
be nominal, when compared to current county -wide petroleum usage rates. Therefore, it is anticipated
the proposed project would be designed and built to minimize transportation energy and it is
anticipated that existing and planned capacity and supplies of transportation fuels would be sufficient
to support the proposed project's demand. Thus, impacts with regard to transportation energy supply
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.6-6 Energy
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
and infrastructure capacity would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be
required.
In conclusion, the proposed project would comply with regulatory compliance measures outlined by
the State and City related to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG), Transportation/Circulation,
and Water Supply. Additionally, the proposed project would be constructed in accordance with all
applicable City Building and Fire Codes. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or
operation. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or
obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The La Quinta General Plan
(City of La Quinta, 2013) contains goals and policies related to energy and energy efficiency. The
proposed project's consistency with the applicable energy -related policies in the General Plan are
shown in Table 4.6-1, Proposed Proiect Compliance with Applicable General Plan Energy Policies.
Table 4.6-1
Proposed Project Compliance with Applicable General Plan Energy Policies
General Plan Policy
Proposed Project Implementation Actions JM
Policy FM-1.1: Strongly encourage conservation of
Consistent. The proposed structures will be designed to
energy resources.
meet the 2019 Title 24 Part 6 building standards that
require enhanced insulation and installation of energy -
efficient appliances to reduce energy usage and
encourage conservation of energy resources.
Policy EM-1.2: Support the use of alternative energy
Consistent. The proposed project will be designed to
and conversion of traditional energy sources to
meet the 2019 or newer Title 24 Part 6 requirements
alternative energy.
that require all single-family homes built in California to
have rooftop solar PV systems.
Source: Source: City of La Quinta, 2013.
As shown in Table 4.6-1, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable energy -related
policies from the General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a
state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.6-7 Energy
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.7 Geology and Soils
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:Ak
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
❑
❑
❑
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
2) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
®
❑
3) Seismic -related ground failure, including
❑
❑
®
❑
liquefaction?
4) 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 offsite
❑
®
❑
❑
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 direct or indirect risks to life or property?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
❑
❑
❑
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
❑
®
❑
❑
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
The following analysis is based on the Geotechnicol Engineering Report prepared for the project site
by Bruin Geotechnical Services, Inc., in September 2021 and is presented in Appendix D. The purpose
of the geotechnical investigation was to evaluate the onsite subsurface soil conditions relative to
geotechnical engineering characteristics of the project site and to provide geotechnical
recommendations relative to the proposed project. The preliminary geotechnical investigation
included performing a site reconnaissance, conducting field subsurface exploration through soil
borings and sampling, a laboratory testing program of selected soil samples and performing an
engineering analyses of the data.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.7-1 Geology and Soils
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
Geotechnical studies prepared for the project site did not identify any onsite geologic hazards. Similar
to other areas in the City, the project site could be subject to seismic shaking impacts. Implementation
of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not increase geologic risks above the level
identified in the existing General Plan. Potential geologic and soil impacts have been evaluated as part
of the evaluation of the proposed project and would be required to incorporate construction design
recommendations to ensure geologic stability and reduce potential impacts to less than significant.
Potential geologic and soil impacts associated with the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change
would be less than significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for
the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
No Impact: Implementation of the project would not be subject to rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Act) regulates development near active
faults in order to mitigate the hazards of surface fault rupture. An active fault is one that has
experienced earthquake activity in the past 11,000 years. Under the Act, the State Geologist is
required to delineate special study zones along known active faults, known as Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zones. The Act also requires that prior to approval of a project, a geologic
study be prepared to define and delineate any hazards from surface rupture and that a 50-foot
building setback be established from any known trace hazard. According to the project
geotechnical report and the California Geologic Survey Indio USGS Quadrangle, there are no
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones on the project site or in the nearby area. Therefore, the
proposed project would not directly or indirectly be exposed to ground rupture impacts.
Therefore, no ground rupture impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project site would be subject to strong seismic ground
shaking. The project site is situated within a seismically active region that could be subject to
ground shaking impacts from several active faults in the region. Active faults in the regional
vicinity with the potential to cause ground shaking in the City of La Quinta include the San
Andreas Fault, the San Jacinto Fault, the Burnt Mountain Fault, and the Elsinore Fault. These
faults would have the potential to produce an earthquake ranging up to 6.9 on the Richter
Scale. In the event an earthquake of this magnitude occurs, the project site could experience
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.7-2 Geology and Soils
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
periodic shaking, possibly of considerable intensity. The potential seismic shaking risks at the
project site would be like other areas in southern California. The proposed structures on the
project site would be required to be designed to meet the City's construction development
standards and the seismic design parameters of the California Uniform Building Code to
withstand potential seismic shaking impacts caused by an earthquake within an acceptable
level of risk. Compliance with the California Uniform Building Code Seismic Safety Standards
would minimize risks related to seismic shaking impacts. Therefore, the proposed project
would not expose people or structures to potential adverse effects of ground shaking. Potential
impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
3) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project site would not be subject to seismic -related
ground failure. Liquefaction is the phenomenon in which loosely deposited soils located below
the water table undergo rapid loss of shear strength due to excess pore pressure generated
when subject to strong earthquake induced ground shaking. Liquefaction is known generally
to occur in saturated or near -saturated cohesionless soils at depths shallower than 50-feet
below the ground surface. According to the City's Environmental Hazard Chapter Seismic
Hazard Map, the project site is located within a Seismic Hazard Zone that has a High Potential
for Liquefaction. However, boring investigations conducted on the site showed relatively firm
sandy silt, and relative densities indicating that the potential for onsite liquefaction or
seismically induced dynamic settlement should be negligible and the site would not require a
liquefaction analysis. The proposed structures on the project site would be required to be
designed to meet the City's construction development standards and the seismic design
parameters of the California Uniform Building Code to withstand potential seismic shaking
impacts and liquefaction hazards within an acceptable level of risk. Compliance with the City
construction development standards and California Uniform Building Code Seismic Safety
Standards would reduce potential liquefaction hazard impacts to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
4) Landslides?
No Impact: The project site would not be subject to landslides. According to the California
Geologic Survey Landslide Hazard Map for the Indio Quadrangle, the project site is identified
as not being susceptible to earthquake induced landslides. Due to the relatively low
topographic relief on the site, the potential for landslides on the site is considered low. Also,
the Specific Plan does not propose to create slopes or features that would increase the
landslide potential beyond existing conditions.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The Grading Plan shows there is an
estimated 2,070 cubic yards of cut material needed for the project in addition to an estimated 32,229
cubic yards of fill to construct the project. The land clearing and grading activities associated with the
Public Review Draft I June 2023 Geology and Soils
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
proposed project would uncover soil, which could be subject to erosion impacts caused by water and
wind. Additionally, construction equipment and vehicles could indirectly transport sediment to offsite
locations. The proposed project would disturb more than one acre of soil. Construction projects which
disturb one or more acres of soil are required to obtain coverage under a general construction permit
issued from the State Water Resources Control Board. The General Construction Permit would require
the filing of a Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Control Board and the preparation of a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP would provide a list of Best Management
Practices to minimize potential adverse erosion impacts. Compliance with Mitigation Measures
HYDRO-1 and GEO-1 requires obtaining a General Construction Permit and implementation of erosion
control measures. Potential impacts related to substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil to a less
than significant level.
In the Coachella Valley, there is a natural sand migration process, called "blowsand," that has direct
and indirect effects on regional air quality. Blowsand produces particulate matter (PM1o) in two ways:
(1) by direct particle erosion and fragmentation as natural PM1o, and (2) by secondary effects, as sand
deposits on road surfaces. SCAQMD has defined a Coachella Valley Blowsand Zone as the corridor of
land extending two miles on either side of the Interstate 10 (1-10) Freeway, beginning at the SR-111/I-
10 junction and continuing southeast to the 1-10/Jefferson Street interchange in Indio. Being located
approximately seven miles south of the 1-10 Freeway, the project site is found outside of this
designated blowsand area but is still exposed to seasonal wind conditions capable of producing fugitive
dust from undeveloped ground conditions.
In order to reduce the effect of windborne erosion at the project site, the project shall be required to
implement the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (PM10 Plan) requirement for a Fugitive
Dust Control Plan. The purpose of this plan is to reduce the amount of particulate matter entrained in
the ambient air as a result of anthropogenic fugitive dust sources by requiring actions to prevent,
reduce or mitigate fugitive dust emissions. The Fugitive Dust Control Plan requires the implementation
of best management practices (BMPs) such as the use of perimeter fencing, applying adhesive dust
suppressant, or watering the project site. The Fugitive Dust Control Requirements for the Coachella
Valley are detailed in SCAQMD Rule 403.1.Other than the "Blowsand Zone" that covers the area within
two miles of both sides of 1-10 west of Jefferson Street (does not include project site), the rules are
basically identical to the SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements that are applicable for the rest of the
SCAQMD area. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1 which requires implementation of
the Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan, potential windborne erosion impacts would be
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
HYDRO-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant will obtain coverage under a General
Construction Permit issued from the State Water Resources Control Board. The General
Construction Permit would require the filing of a Notice of Intent with the State Water
Resources Control Board and the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP).
GEO-1: During construction, Grading Plans for the project shall implement fugitive dust control
measures and windborne erosion control measures from the Coachella Valley PM10 State
Implementation Plan.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.7-4
Geology and Soils
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
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 offsite landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project would not 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 offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. The
geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project identified the following geologic conditions on
the project site.
GEOLOGIC CONSTRAINTS
Landslides: As previously identified, the project site is identified as not being susceptible to earthquake
induced landslides.
Liquefaction: As previously identified from the project geotechnical report, the potential for ground
failure and liquefaction would be low.
Lateral Spreading: Potential hazards associated with liquefaction include lateral spreading and slow
slides, foundation bearing failure, and ground surface settlement. Because the upper SO feet of the
native soils are not likely to liquefy, the potential for lateral spreading would also be low.
Ground Lurching: Ground lurching is generally associated with fault rupture and liquefaction. As these
hazards are considered unlikely, the potential for ground lurching would be low.
SOIL CONSTRAINTS
The upper four to five feet of soil were found to be non -uniform with some areas of the site soils
subject to hydro -consolidation. Based on the laboratory testing and subsurface data obtained, it is the
opinion of the Bruin Geotechnical Engineering Report that the upper site soils would not provide a
uniform soil support system without remediation through recompaction. To provide a more uniform
soil support system and minimize the potential for differential settlement, the proposed structures
should be supported by a recompacted fill mat and ensure that the recommendations in the Bruin
Geotechnical Engineering Report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project.
With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-2, potential soil constraints and associated impacts
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
GEO-2: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City of La Quinta shall confirm that grading and
construction plans for the project incorporate design recommendations provided in the
Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Bruin Geotechnical Services, Inc., September
2021. The design recommendations shall address site earthwork; remedial grading for
building pads; asphalt, pavement, and concrete; fill placement and compaction; soil
shrinkage; fill slope stability; imported soils; post grading pad drainage foundation design
recommendations; retaining walls and structures; corrosion and chemical attack,
excavations; utility trenches and backfill; interior concrete; exterior concrete rigid
pavement; pavement design; and construction considerations.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.7-5 Geology and Soils
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project would not be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or
property. Expansive soils are defined as fine grained silts and clays which are subject to swelling and
contracting. The amount of swelling and contracting would be subject to the amount of fine-grained
clay materials present in the soils and the amount of moisture either introduced or extracted from the
soils. The expansion index tests conducted on the onsite soils indicate that the surficial soils are within
the "very low" expansion category. Potential impacts associated with expansive soils would be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
No Impact: The proposed project would not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems. Therefore, no impacts would occur regarding septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the project
would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature. The project site is identified in the General Plan (La Quinta 2013) as being in an area of high
paleontological sensitivity. A paleontological record search of the project area and the environs was
conducted at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLAC) by Samuel A. McLeod,
Ph.D. on August 9, 2019. A second search was completed by Darla Radford from the Western Science
Center (WSC) in Hemet on July 29, 2021 (Appendix C).
The NHMLAC record search revealed that no paleontological finds have occurred within the project
area; however, nearby fossil localities have occurred within the sedimentary deposits that underlie the
project area (McLeod 2019). The entire proposed project area has surface deposits composed of
Pleistocene and Holocene lacustrine and fluvial deposits, known as Lake Cahuilla beds. These deposits
have contained significant vertebrate and invertebrate fossils in the uppermost layers, such as
diatoms, land plants, clams, snails, crustaceans, and a bighorn sheep jawbone. Significant excavations
below the uppermost soils and younger Quaternary Alluvium that extend into older sedimentary
deposits may well encounter significant vertebrate fossils. Therefore, the NHMLAC recommended that
any substantial excavations in the proposed project area should be closely monitored to quickly and
professionally recover any fossil remains while not impeding development.
The WSC record search also revealed that no fossil localities have been recorded within one mile of
the project site (Radford 2021). The WSC maps the project site as alluvial sand and clay deposits dating
to the Holocene epoch. Older Holocene or Late Pleistocene sediments would lie at depth. Excavations
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.7-6 Geology and Soils
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
that would disturb these deeper sediments could encounter scientifically significant fossil material;
therefore, the WSC recommends that caution during development should be observed.
Based upon this information and the results of the paleontological resources records search,
paleontologically sensitive sediments consisting of undisturbed older Pleistocene alluvium lie below
the surficial Younger Holocene alluvium on the project site. Monitoring of excavation in these sensitive
sediments under the direct guidance of a qualified paleontologist is recommended once earthmoving
reaches 3-5 feet below the original ground surface. Monitors should be equipped to salvage fossils, as
they are unearthed, to avoid construction delays and to remove samples of sediments that are likely
to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. Monitors must be empowered to
temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large specimens. Monitoring
may be reduced if the potentially fossiliferous units described are not present, or, if present, are
determined upon exposure and examination by qualified paleontological personnel to have low
potential to contain fossil resources. With implementation of Mitigation Measures PALEO-1, PALEO-2,
and PALEO-3, potential impacts to paleontological resources would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
PALEO-1: Once earthmoving reaches 3-5 feet below the original ground surface, excavation shall be
monitored under the direct guidance of a qualified paleontologist.
PALEO-2: The project paleontologist retained shall review the approved development plan and shall
conduct any pre -construction work necessary to render appropriate monitoring and
mitigation requirements as appropriate. These requirements shall be documented by the
project paleontologist in a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP).
This PRIMP shall be submitted to the City's Design and Development Department for
review and approval prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. Information to be contained in
the PRIMP shall meet the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards.
PALEO-3: If paleontological resources are detected and recovered during monitoring, a report must
be prepared. The following items must be presented in the report: recovered specimens
must be prepared to a point of identification and permanent preservation, including
washing of sediments to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates. The recovered fossils
must be identified and curated into a professional, fully accredited museum repository
with permanent retrievable storage (e.g., WSC). The paleontologist must have a written
repository agreement in hand prior to the initiation of mitigation activities. The report and
inventory, when submitted to the Lead Agency, will signify completion of the program to
mitigate impacts to paleontological resources.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.7-7 Geology and Soils
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
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?
The following analysis is based on an Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact
Analysis prepared by Vista Environmental in October 2021. The report is presented in its entirety in
Appendix A.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Existing Setting
Constituent gases of the earth's atmosphere, called atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs), play a
critical role in the earth's radiation amount by trapping infrared radiation from the earth's surface,
which otherwise would have escaped to space. Prominent greenhouse gases contributing to this
process include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone (03), water vapor, nitrous oxide (N20),
and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). This phenomenon, known as the Greenhouse Effect, is responsible
for maintaining a habitable climate. Anthropogenic (caused or produced by humans) emissions of
these greenhouse gases in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for the
enhancement of the Greenhouse Effect and have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the earth's
natural climate, known as global warming or climate change. Emissions of gases that induce global
warming are attributable to human activities associated with industrial/manufacturing, agriculture,
utilities, transportation, and residential land uses. Emissions of CO2 and N20 are byproducts of fossil
fuel combustion. Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, 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. The following provides a description of each of
the greenhouse gases and their global warming potential.
• Water Vapor: Water vapor is the most abundant, important, and variable GHG in the
atmosphere. Water vapor is not considered a pollutant; in the atmosphere it maintains a
climate necessary for life. Changes in its concentration are primarily considered a result of
climate feedbacks related to the warming of the atmosphere rather than a direct result of
industrialization. The feedback loop in which water is involved is critically important to
projecting future climate change.
• Carbon Dioxide: The natural production and absorption of CO2 is achieved through the
terrestrial biosphere and the ocean. However, humankind has altered the natural carbon cycle
by burning coal, oil, natural gas, and wood. The concentration of carbon dioxide in the
atmosphere is projected to increase to a minimum of 540 ppm by 2100 as a direct result of
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.8-1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
anthropogenic sources. This could result in an average global temperature rise of at least two
degrees Celsius or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit.
• Methane: CH4 is an extremely effective absorber of radiation, although its atmospheric
concentration is less than that of CO2. Its lifetime in the atmosphere is brief (10 to 12 years),
compared to some other GHGs (such as CO2, N20, and Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)).
• Nitrous Oxide: Concentrations of N20 also began to rise at the beginning of the industrial
revolution. In 1998, the global concentration of this GHG was documented at 314 parts per
billion (ppb). N20 is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those
reactions which occur in fertilizer containing nitrogen.
• Chlorofluorocarbons: CFCs are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in
methane or ethane (C2H6) with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms. CFCs are nontoxic,
nonflammable, insoluble, and chemically unreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at the
earth's surface).
• Hydrofluorocarbons: HFCs are synthetic man-made chemicals that are used as a substitute for
CFCs. Out of all the GHGs, they are one of three groups with the highest global warming
potential.
• Perfluorocarbons: Two common PFCs are tetrafluoromethane (CF4) and hexafluoroethane
(C2F6). Concentrations of CF4 in the atmosphere are over 70 ppt. The two main sources of PFCs
are primary aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing.
• Sulfur Hexafluoride: Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, nontoxic,
nonflammable gas. SF6 has the highest global warming potential of any gas evaluated; 23,900
times that of CO2.
• Aerosols: Aerosols are particles emitted into the air through burning biomass (plant material)
and fossil fuels. Aerosols can warm the atmosphere by absorbing and emitting heat and can
cool the atmosphere by reflecting light.
GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIAL
GHGs have varying global warming potential (GWP). The GWP is the potential of a gas or aerosol to
trap heat in the atmosphere; it is the cumulative radiative forcing effects of a gas over a specified time
horizon resulting from the emission of a unit mass of gas relative to the reference gas, CO2. The GHGs
listed by the IPCC and the CEQA Guidelines are discussed in this section in order of abundance in the
atmosphere. Water vapor, the most abundant GHG, is not included in this list because its natural
concentrations and fluctuations far outweigh its anthropogenic (human -made) sources. To simplify
reporting and analysis, GHGs are commonly defined in terms of their GWP. The IPCC defines the GWP
of various GHG emissions on a normalized scale that recasts all GHG emissions in terms of CO2
equivalent (CO2e). As such, the GWP of CO2 is equal to 1. The GWP values used in this analysis are
based on the 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, which are used in CARB's 2014 Scoping Plan
Update and the CaIEEMod Model Version 2020.4.0 and are detailed in Table 4.8-1, Global Warming
Potentials, Atmospheric Lifetimes and Abundances of GHGs. The IPCC has updated the Global Warming
Potentials of some gases in their Fifth Assessment Report; however, the new values have not yet been
incorporated into the CaIEEMod model that has been utilized in this analysis.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.8-2
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.8-1
Global Warming Potentials, Atmospheric Lifetimes and Abundances of GHGs
Atmospheric Lifetime
Global Warming Potential
Atmospheric
Gas
(years)'
(100 Year Horizon)'
Carbon Dioxide (COz)
50-200
1
379 ppm
Methane (CH4)
9-15
25
1,774 ppb
Nitrous Oxide (N20)
114
298
319 ppb
HFC-23
270
14,800
18 ppt
HFC-134a
14
1,430
35 ppt
HFC-152a
1.4
124
3.9 ppt
PFC: Tetrafluoromethane (CF4)
50,000
7,390
74 ppt
PFC: Hexafluoroethane (C2F6)
10,000
12,200
2.9 ppt
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
3,200
22,800
5.6 ppt
Definitions: ppm = parts per million; ppb = parts per billion; ppt = parts per trillion
Notes:
1 Defined as the half-life of the gas.
2 Compared to the same quantity of CO2 emissions and is based on the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC)
2007 standard, which is utilized in CaIEEMod (Version 2016.3.2),that is used in this report (CalEEMod user guide: Appendix
A).
Source: Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis; October 28, 2021.
Regulatory Setting
The regulatory setting related to global climate change is addressed through the efforts of various
international, federal, state, regional, and local government agencies. These agencies work jointly, as
well as individually, to reduce GHG emissions through legislation, regulations, planning, policy making,
education, and a variety of programs. The agencies responsible for global climate change regulations
are discussed below.
INTERNATIONAL
In 1988, the United Nations established the IPCC to evaluate the impacts of global climate change and
to develop strategies that nations could implement to curtail global climate change. In 1992, the
United States joined other countries around the world in signing the United Nations' Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) agreement with the goal of controlling GHG emissions. The
parties of the UNFCCC adopted the Kyoto Protocol, which set binding GHG reduction targets for 37
industrialized countries, with the objective of reducing their collective GHG emissions by five percent
(5%) below 1990 levels by 2012. The Kyoto Protocol has been ratified by 182 countries, but has not
been ratified by the United States. It should be noted that Japan and Canada opted out of the Kyoto
Protocol and the remaining developed countries that ratified the Kyoto Protocol have not met their
Kyoto targets. The Kyoto Protocol expired in 2012 and the amendment for the second commitment
period from 2013 to 2020 has not yet entered into legal force. The parties to the Kyoto Protocol
negotiated the Paris Agreement in December 2015, agreeing to set a goal of limiting global warming
to less than 2 degrees Celsius compared with pre -industrial levels. The Paris Agreement has been
adopted by 195 nations with 147 ratifying it, including the United States by President Obama, who
ratified it by Executive Order on September 3, 2016. On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced
Public Review Draft I June 2023
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
that the United States is withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and on January 21, 2021, President
Biden signed an executive order rejoining the Paris Agreement.
FEDERAL
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for implementing federal
policy to address global climate change. The federal government administers a wide array of public -
private partnerships to reduce U.S. GHG intensity. These programs focus on energy efficiency,
renewable energy, methane, and other non-0O2 gases, agricultural practices and implementation of
technologies to achieve GHG reductions. EPA implements several voluntary programs that
substantially contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions.
STATE
California Air Resources Board (CARB) has proposed interim statewide CEQA thresholds for GHG
emissions and released Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for
Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act, on October 24, 2008, that has been
utilized by the SCAQMD's GHG Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group in their framework
for developing SCAQMD's draft GHG emissions thresholds. California currently has no regulations that
establish ambient air quality standards for GHGs. However, California has passed laws directing CARB
to develop actions to reduce GHG emissions. The following is a listing of relevant state laws to reduce
GHG emissions. Detail discussion of each State is presented in Appendix A.
• Executive Order B-30-15, Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197
• Assembly Bill 1493
• Executive Order S-3-05
• Assembly Bill 32
• Executive Order S-1-07
• Senate Bill 97
• Senate Bill 375
• Assembly Bill 341 and Senate Bills 939 and 1374
• California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 11
REGIONAL
South Coast Air Quality Management District
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) develops rules and regulations,
establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources, inspects emission sources, and enforces
such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. SCAQMD is directly
responsible for reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources. The SCAQMD is also
responsible for GHG emissions for projects where it is the lead agency. However, for other projects in
the SSAB where it is not the lead agency, it is limited to providing resources to other lead agencies in
order to assist them in determining GHG emission thresholds and GHG reduction measures. In order
to assist local agencies with direction on GHG emissions, the SCAQMD organized a Working Group,
which is described below.
SCAQMD Working Group. Since neither CARB northe OPR has developed a GHG emissions threshold,
the SCAQMD formed a Working Group to develop significance thresholds related to GHG emissions.
At the September 28, 2010, Working Group meeting, the SCAQMD released its most current version
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.8-4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
of the draft GHG emissions thresholds, which recommends a tiered approach that either provides a
quantitative annual threshold of 3,500 MTCOZe for residential uses, 1,400 MTCOZe for commercial
uses, 3,000 MTCO2e for mixed uses, and 10,000 MTCOze for industrial uses.
Southern California Association of Governments
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the regional planning agency for Los
Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties and addresses regional
issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development and the environment. SCAG
is the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the majority of the southern
California region and is the largest MPO in the nation. With respect to air quality planning, SCAG has
prepared the Connect SoCal and 2019 FTIP which addresses regional development and growth
forecasts. Although the Connect SoCal and 2019 FTIP are primarily planning documents for future
transportation projects and a key component of these plans is to integrate land use planning with
transportation planning that promotes higher density infill development in close proximity to existing
transit service. These plans form the basis for the land use and transportation components of the
AQMP, which are utilized in the preparation of air quality forecasts and in consistency analysis included
in the AQMP. The Connect SoCal, 2019FTIP, and AQMP are based on projections originating within the
City and County General Plans.
LOCAL
City of La Quinta
Local jurisdictions, such as the City of La Quinta, have the authority and responsibility to reduce GHG
emissions through their police power and decision -making authority. Specifically, the City of La Quinta
is responsible for the assessment and mitigation of GHG emissions resulting from its land use decisions.
In accordance with CEQA requirements and the CEQA review process, the City assesses the global
climate change potential of new development projects, requires mitigation of potentially significant
global climate change impacts by conditioning discretionary permits, and monitors and enforces
implementation of such mitigation.
Lo Quinta General Plan
The La Quinta General Plan (City of La Quinta, 2013), provides the following GHG emissions -related
policy that is applicable to the proposed project.
Policy AQ-1.7: Greenhouse gas emissions associated with a development project shall
demonstrate adherence to the City's GHG Reduction Plan.
City ofLo Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan
The La Quinta Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (La Quinta GHG Plan), was adopted by the City on
February 19, 2013. The La Quinta GHG Plan has set forth reduction targets consistent with AB 32 and
aims to reduce COZe emissions to 10% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 28% below 2005 levels by 2035.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.8-5 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Threshold of Significance
Since the La Quinta GHG Plan does not provide any quantitative GHG emissions thresholds for new
development projects nor does it provide any direction on how to analyze new development projects
within the City, the SCAQMD GHG emissions reduction thresholds have been utilized in this analysis.
To identify significance criteria under CEQA for development projects, SCAQMD initiated a Working
Group, which provided detailed methodology for evaluating significance under CEQA. At the
September 28, 2010, Working Group meeting, the SCAQMD released its most current version of the
draft GHG emissions thresholds, which recommends a tiered approach that provides a quantitative
annual threshold of 3,000 MTCOZe for all land use projects. Although the SCAQMD provided
substantial evidence supporting the use of the above threshold, the SCAQMD Board has not yet
considered or approved the Working Group's thresholds. However, it should be noted that the
SCAQMD threshold was utilized in DSEIR No. 330.
It should be noted that SCAQMD's Working Group's thresholds were prepared prior to the issuance of
Executive Order B-30-15 on April 29, 2015, that provided a reduction goal of 40% below 1990 levels
by 2030. This target was codified into a statute through passage of AB 197 and SB 32 in September
2016. However, to date no air district or local agency within California has provided guidance on how
to address AB 197 and SB 32 with relation to land use projects. In addition, the California Supreme
Court's ruling on Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of Governments
(Cleveland v. SANDAG), Filed July 13, 2017, stated:
SANDAG did not abuse its discretion in declining to adopt the 2050 goal as a measure of
significance in light of the fact that the Executive Order does not specify any plan or
implementation measures to achieve its goal. In its response to comments, the EIR said: "It is
uncertain what role regional land use and transportation strategies can or should play in
achieving the EO's 2050 emissions reduction target. A recent California Energy Commission
report concludes, however, that the primary strategies to achieve this target should be major
'decarbonization' of electricity supplies and fuels, and major improvements in energy efficiency
[citation].
Although, the above court case was referencing California's GHG emission targets for the year 2050,
at this time, it is also unclear what role land use strategies can or should play in achieving the AB 197
and SB 32 reduction goal of 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. As such this analysis has relied on the
SCAQMD Working Group's recommended thresholds. Therefore, the proposed project would be
considered to create a significant cumulative GHG impact if the proposed project would exceed the
annual threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase the population on the
project site above what is currently projected for the project, which would increase greenhouse gas
emissions above what was evaluated in the General Plan. The greenhouse gas emission analysis
prepared for the proposed project considered and evaluated the incremental increase of greenhouse
gas emissions associated with increased population on the project site and determined that
greenhouse emission impacts would be less than significant. Potential greenhouse gas emission
impacts associated with the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would be less than
significant.
Public Review Draft I June 2023
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not generate GHG emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. The proposed project
consists of a residential development that would include 80 detached single-family homes. The
proposed project is anticipated to generate GHG emissions from area sources, energy usage, mobile
sources, waste disposal, water usage, and construction equipment and include energy efficiencies
from Title 24 standards. The project's GHG emissions have been calculated with the CalEEMod model
based on the construction and operational parameters. A summary of the results is shown below in
Table 4.8-2, Project Related Greenhouse Gas Annual Emissions.
Table 4.8-2
Project Related Greenhouse Gas Annual Emissions
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons per Year)
Category
pAreaSource�sr!
CH4
N20
CO2e
0.99
<0.00
<0.00
1.02
Energy Usage
130.59
<0.00
<0.00
131.43
Mobile Sources'
588.93
0.04
0.03
599.29
Solid Waste'
9.78
0.58
<0.00
24.23
Water and Wastewaters
9.18
0.14
<0.00
13.72
Construction'
22.02
<0.00
<0.00
22.39
Total Emissions
761.49
0.76
0.03
792.08
SCAQMD Draft Threshold of Significance
3,000
Notes:
1 Area sources consist of GHG emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, hearths, and landscaping equipment.
2 Energy usage consists of GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas usage.
3 Mobile sources consist of GHG emissions from vehicles.
4 Waste includes the CO2 and CH4 emissions created from the solid waste placed in landfills.
5 Water includes GHG emissions from electricity used for transport of water and processing of wastewater.
6 Construction emissions amortized over 30 years as recommended in the SCAQMD GHG Working Group on November 19,
2009.
Source: Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis; October 28, 2021.
The data provided in Table 4.8-2 shows that the proposed project would create 792.08 MTCO2e per
year. According to the SCAQMD draft threshold of significance, a cumulative global climate change
impact would occur if the GHG emissions created from the on -going operations would exceed 3,000
MTCO2e per year. It should be noted that the most current 2019 Title 24 Part 6 building energy
efficiency standards now require that all new homes built in the State to be designed to be net zero
energy usage that is achieved through requirements for enhanced insulation, use of energy efficient
appliances and lighting, and solar rooftop PV systems to adequately meet net zero energy usage.
Therefore, a less than significant generation of greenhouse gas emissions would occur from
development of the proposed project. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan,
policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The applicable
plan for the proposed project is the La Quinta GHG Plan (City of La Quinta, 2013). The La Quinta GHG
Plan has set forth reduction targets consistent with AB 32 and aims to reduce CO2e emissions to 10%
below 2005 levels by 2020, and 28% below 2005 levels by 2035. The proposed project's consistency
with the applicable measures in the La Quinta GHG Plan are shown in Table 4.8-3, Proposed Project
Compliance with the La Quinta GHG Plan Policies.
Table 4.8-3
Proposed Project Compliance with the La Quinta GHG Plan Policies
Measure
GHG Plan Policy
Proposed Project Consistency
ND-1
Encourage and promote all new commercial and
Consistent. The proposed homes will be designed
residential development achieve energy efficiency
to meet the 2019 Title 24 Part 11 Green Building
and incorporate sustainable design principles that
Code standards that exceed the 2013 Title 24 Part
exceed Green Building Code requirements.
11 Green Building Code standards.
ND-2
Work towards carbon neutrality for all new
Consistent. The proposed homes will be designed
buildings to achieve a net zero emission of GHGs
to meet the 2019 Title 24 Part 6 building standards
through design measures, onsite renewables, and
that require all new homes to be designed to be
offsets.
net zero energy usage through enhanced
insulation and installation of energy -efficient
appliances as well as installation of rooftop solar
PV systems.
ND-3
Encourage all new development to meet 50% of
Consistent. The proposed homes will be designed
energy demand through onsite solar or other non-
to meet the 2019 Title 24 Part 6 building standards
polluting source.
that require all new homes to be designed to be
net zero energy usage through installation of
rooftop solar PV systems.
ND-4
Encourage all new development to minimize
Consistent. The proposed project will include
vehicle trips.
onsite recreational activities at the proposed open
space lot as well as include onsite sidewalks that
will encourage alternative modes of transportation
that will minimize vehicle trips.
ND-6
Require that new development accommodate
Consistent. The proposed project will include
pedestrians and bicyclists.
onsite sidewalks that will accommodate
pedestrians and bicyclists.
ND-7
Encourage all new development to utilize materials
Consistent. The proposed homes will be designed
that consist of recycled materials and are
to meet the 2019 Title 24 Part 11 Green Building
recyclable.
Code standards that require that a minimum of
65% of construction waste to be diverted from
landfills through re -use and recycling programs.
Source: City of La Quinta, 2013.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.8-8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
As shown in Table 4.8-3, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable La Quinta GHG
Plan policies for new residential development. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent
with the La Quinta GHG plan and the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan,
policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.8-9 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Would the project:
Significant
Impact With
Significant
o
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
pa
Incorporated
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 reasonably foreseeable upset
❑
❑
®
❑
and accident conditions 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 or
excessive noise 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?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment did not identify hazardous waste on the project site or
any listed hazardous waste sites near the project site (refer to Appendix E, Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment Report). Implementation of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change
would not increase the risk for hazardous material impacts and would be required to comply with local,
state, and federal laws regarding the handling, storage and transporting of hazardous substances. With
compliance with local, state, and federal laws, potential hazardous materials impacts associated with
the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would be less than significant.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.9-1 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials.
Hazardous materials have been and are commonly used in commercial, agricultural, and industrial
applications as well as in residential areas. Hazardous wastes are hazardous materials that no longer
have practical use, such as substances that have been discarded, discharged, spilled, contaminated, or
are being stored prior to proper disposal. The health impacts of hazardous materials exposure are
based on the frequency of exposure, the exposure pathway, and individual susceptibility.
LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL
The long-term operation of the proposed project would not be expected to involve the routine
transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials in quantities or conditions that would pose a hazard
to public health and safety or the environment. The operation of the proposed project could involve
the use of cleaning products and occasional use of pesticide activities and herbicides for landscape
maintenance. The materials would be common for general maintenance and would not be stored in
enormous quantities that pose a health hazard to the public. Potential impacts would be less than
significant.
The construction operations associated with the proposed project would involve the handling of
incidental amounts of hazardous substances, such as solvents, fuels, and oil. To avoid public exposure
to hazardous materials, the proposed project would be required to comply with local, state, and
federal laws and regulations regarding the handling and storage of hazardous materials. With
compliance with local, state, and federal hazardous material laws and regulations and implementation
of BMPs, potential hazardous impacts to the public would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The construction
operations associated with the proposed project would involve the handling of incidental amounts of
hazardous substances, such as solvents, fuels, and oil. The level of risk associated with the accidental
release of hazardous substances would not be considered significant due to the small volume and low
concentration of hazardous materials that would be utilized during construction. The construction
contractor would be required to use standard construction controls and safety procedures that would
avoid or minimize the potential for accidental release of hazardous substances into the environment.
The most relevant measures would pertain to material delivery and storage; material use; and spill
prevention and control. These measures would outline the required improvements and procedures
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.9-2 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
for preventing impacts of hazardous materials to workers and the environment during construction.
With compliance with local, state, and federal hazardous material laws and regulations and
implementation of material delivery and storage, material use, and spill prevention and control BMPs,
potential hazardous impacts involving the accidental release of hazardous materials into the
environment would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school. The project site is not located within 0.25 miles of a school. The nearest school to
the project site would be Westside Elementary (82225 Airport Boulevard, Thermal, CA) located
approximately one mile to the north of the project site. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The project would not 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 not create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report was prepared by Partner Engineering
and Science, Inc. in July 2019 (Appendix E) forthe project site to identify any Recognized Environmental
Conditions, Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions, and Historical Recognized
Environmental Conditions.
A recognized environmental condition refers to the presence or likely presence of any hazardous
substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property due to release to the environment, under
conditions indicative of a release to the environment, or under conditions that pose a material threat
of a future release to the environment. No evidence of a recognized environmental condition was
identified on the project site.
A controlled recognized environmental condition refers to a REC resulting from a past release of
hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the
applicable regulatory authority, with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain
in place subject to the implementation of required controls. No evidence of a recognized
environmental condition was identified on the project site.
A historical recognized environmental condition refers to a past release of any hazardous substances
or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to
the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established
by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls. No evidence of a
historical recognized environmental condition was identified on the project site.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.9-3 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
While the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment did not identify any recognized environmental
conditions, it did identify one environmental issue on the site. The project site was utilized for
agricultural purposes as early as 1949 until about 2002. It is unknown if environmentally persistent
pesticides and/or herbicides were historically applied to the crops grown on the subject property.
According to the Phase I Site Assessment and experience with similar agricultural properties, there
would be low potential for soil contamination at concentrations in excess of regulatory thresholds as
a result of the past use of persistent pesticides/herbicides from normal crop application. The
accumulation of persistent pesticides/herbicides in soils at concentrations in excess of regulatory
thresholds is more commonly associated with the cultivation of orchards over prolonged periods of
time; or in areas where repeated mixing and rinsing of chemical application equipment may have
occurred. No specific areas of concern related to onsite agricultural chemical storage and usage (spills,
releases, etc.) were identified and the potential for elevated concentrations of environmentally
persistent pesticides/herbicides to exist in the near -surface soils of the subject property, which would
require regulatory action, would appear to be low. Even though no recognized environmental
conditions were identified, however, because of the historical agriculture use of the property, it is
recommended that a Phase II investigation could be conducted to assess the presence or absence of
environmentally persistent agricultural chemicals within near surface soils. With implementation of
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, the potential for the project to create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
HAZ-1: Prior to issuance of grading permit, a Phase II investigation will be conducted to assess the
presence or absence of environmentally persistent agricultural chemicals within near
surface soils.
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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in
the project area?
No Impact: The project would not be within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, which
would result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area.
The project site is not located within an airport land use plan and there are no public airports within
two miles of the project site. The nearest airport is Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport that is located
as near as 3.6 miles east of the project site. In addition, the Crown Aero (Bermuda Dunes) Airport is
approximately 8 miles away from the project site and the Palm Springs International (PSP) Airport
which is 20 miles from the site. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in safety hazards or
excessive noise impacts within the project area.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not impair
implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan. The City's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), identifies hazards and vulnerabilities,
provides mitigation strategies, and coordinates all institutions for disaster mitigation planning and
Public Review Draft I June 2023
4.9-4
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
action within the City. The LMHP was last updated in 2022, and identified specific hazards including
earthquake, flood, extreme weather, and drought. The City also establishes procedures and
responsibilities for City personnel in its adopted Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), including planning
and designation of evacuation routes under different scenarios. The City's primary tool in preparing
for emergencies is its adopted EOP. The Emergency Services Division is responsible for emergency
preparedness in the City. The Division is responsible for both planning and implementation of
emergency response efforts, and coordinates with other local jurisdictions and the County of Riverside
in emergency response planning, training, and disaster exercises. The City also participates in the
County of Riverside Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, which was updated in 2017. Like
local, the County LHMP consists of the Riverside County Operational Area Plan including the City of La
Quinta. Close coordination with both the police and fire departments is included in all disaster planning
efforts. In addition, the City participates in the California Standardized Emergency Management
System (SEMS) program, and Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) National Incident
Management System (NIMS), to assure coordinated response at the state and federal levels. In the
event evacuation is required, the Riverside County Sheriff's Department would identify and direct
traffic to designated emergency evacuation routes to ensure that residents can leave their
neighborhoods safely, which would avoid any potential conflicts with emergency response plans.
Residents of the project would comply with the City's emergency response plans. Potential impacts
associated with conflicts to emergency response plans would be less than significant.
The construction activities for the proposed project would not involve any activities that would
physically impair or interfere with emergency response plans for the project area. During construction,
there could be the potential for temporary lane closures to allow for utility connections. However, the
temporary lane closures would be for a brief period and would be implemented in accordance with
recommendations provided in the California Temporary Traffic Control Handbook to ensure that
emergency access would always be maintained. Potential impacts associated with conflicts to
emergency response plans would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of 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. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the project site is not
within a Very High Fire Hazard Zone and not subject to wildland fire impacts.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.9-5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
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
❑
❑
❑
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:
1) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
❑
®
❑
❑
offsite?
2) Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
❑
❑
®
❑
flooding on- or offsite?
3) 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?
4) 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?
The following analysis is based on a Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) (February
28, 2023) and a Preliminary Hydrology Study (February 28, 2023) prepared by D&D Engineering, Inc.
and presented in Appendix F.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Existing Setting
The project site is located in the Whitewater Watershed. The Whitewater Watershed is home to the
cities of Cathedral City, Palm Springs, Rancho Mirage, Palm Desert, Indian Wells, Indio, La Quinta, and
Coachella. The watershed drains into the Whitewater River. The Whitewater River is a small permanent
stream and begins its free -flowing journey from the 11,499-foot-high summit of Mount San Gorgonio
in the San Bernardino mountains. It is joined by three significant tributaries before reaching the Salton
Sea.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-1 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board Colorado
River Basin Plan (Basin Plan). For planning purposes, the site is within the Coachella Valley Planning
Area. This planning area contains the Whitewater Hydrologic Unit and the East Salton Sea Hydrologic
Unit. It lies almost entirely in Riverside County and covers 1,920 square miles in the west central
portion of the region. The San Bernardino Mountains and the Little San Bernardino Mountains form
the northern boundary.
The Whitewater River is the major drainage course in the Planning Area. There is perennial flow in the
mountains, but because of diversions and percolation into the basin, the Whitewater River becomes
dry further downstream. The constructed downstream extension of the river channel known as the
Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel, serves as a drainage way for irrigation return flows, treated
community wastewater, and storm runoff.
GROUND WATER
Ground water is stored principally in the unconsolidated Pleistocene sediments. Wells yield up to 4,000
gpm. The maximum thickness of the water -bearing sediments is not known; however, it exceeds 1,000
feet in Coachella Valley. Ground water is generally unconfined except in the lower areas of the
Coachella Valley. A clay aquitard, a result of past sedimentation in the old lakebed, extends from the
Salton Sea to some distance west of Indio, overlying the domestic -use aquifers. The clay layer underlies
lenses of permeable sediments and perched ground waters which are replenished by percolating
irrigation water
Efforts to recharge the ground water basin in the Coachella Valley began in 1919 when the Coachella
Valley County Water District constructed facilities to capture natural flows from the Whitewater River
channel to recharge the upper portion of the Whitewater River Subbasin. In 1973, the Coachella Valley
Water District (CVWD) and Desert Water Agency (DWA) began importing Colorado River water to the
Whitewater recharge facility. The imported water was obtained from the Metropolitan Water District
of Southern California via the Colorado River Aqueduct in exchange for State Water Project water, for
the purpose of increasing ground water recharge in the upper portion of the Whitewater River
Subbasin.
Regulatory Framework
The project site is currently undeveloped and 100% pervious with no onsite drainage facilities. The
natural drainage is from the southwest to the northeast. The project would be improved with onsite
drainage facilities that would drain into the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel and ultimately into
the Salton Sea.
The Basin Plan designates beneficial uses for surface waters and groundwater basins. Additionally, the
Basin Plan identifies impaired water bodies and environmental sensitive areas within the region that
afford additional protection.
BENEFICIAL USES
The Basin Plan designates beneficial uses for surface waters in the Coachella Valley. The beneficial uses
include quantitative and narrative criteria for a range of water quality constituents that are applicable
to certain receiving water bodies in order to protect the beneficial uses. The beneficial uses in the
Basin Plan are described in Table 4.10-1, Beneficial Use Descriptions.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-2 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.10-1
Beneficial Use Descriptions
Abbreviation
Beneficial Use
jj
GWR
Groundwater Recharge waters are used for natural or artificial recharge of groundwater for
purposes that may include, but are not limited to, future extraction, maintaining water quality or
halting saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers.
REC 1
Water Contact Recreation waters are used for recreational activities involving body contact with
water where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses may include, but are not
limited to, swimming, wading, water skiing, skin and scuba diving, surfing, whitewater activities,
fishing and use of natural hot springs.
REC 2
Non -Contact Water Recreation waters are used for recreational activities involving proximity to
water, but not normally body contact with water where ingestion of water would be reasonably
possible. These uses may include, but are not limited to, picnicking, sunbathing, hiking,
beachcombing, camping, boating, tide pool and marine life study, hunting, sightseeing and
aesthetic enjoyment in -conjunction with the above activities.
WARM
Warm waters support warm water ecosystems that may include, but are not limited to,
preservation and enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, and wildlife, including
invertebrates.
AQUA
Uses of water for agriculture or mariculture operations including, but not limited to propagation,
cultivation, maintenance, or harvesting of aquatic plants and animals for human consumption or
bait purposes.
COLD
Cold Freshwater habitat waters support cold water ecosystems.
FRSH
Uses of water for natural or artificial maintenance of surface water quantity or quality.
WILD
Wildlife Habitat waters support wildlife habitats that may include, but are not limited to, the
preservation and enhancement of vegetation and prey species used by waterfowl and other
wildlife.
RARE
Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species (RARE) waters support habitats necessary for the
survival and successful maintenance of plant or animal species designated under state or federal
law as rare, threatened or endangered.
MUN
Municipal and Domestic Supply waters are used for community, military, municipal or individual
water supply systems. These uses may include, but are not limited to, drinking water supply.
AGR
Agricultural Supply waters are used forfarming, horticulture or ranching. These uses may include,
but are not limited to, irrigation, stock watering, and support of vegetation for range grazing.
IND
Industrial Service Supply waters are used for industrial activities that do not depend primarily on
water quality. These uses may include, but are not limited to, mining, cooling water supply,
hydraulic conveyance, gravel washing, fire protection and oil well depressurization.
PROC
Industrial Process Supply waters are used for industrial activities that depend primarily on water
quality. These uses may include, but are not limited to, process water supply and all uses of water
related to product manufacture or food preparation.
POW
Hydropower Generation waters are used for hydroelectric power generation.
Source: California Water Boards, Colorado River Basin Plan , updated June 2019.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-3 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
As shown in Table 4.10-2, Study Area Water Body Beneficial Uses, the Basin Plan identifies beneficial
uses for the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel and the Salton Sea.
Table 4.10-2
Study Area Water Body Beneficial Uses
Beneficial Use
Coachella Valley Storm
Water Channel
Salton Sea
FRSH
E
NL
IND
NL
P
REC 1
E
P
REC 2
EE
E
WARM
E
E
WILD
E
E
RARE
NL
E
Notes: E=Existing, P= Pending, NL-Not Listed
SECTION 303(D) WATER BODIES
Under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, the SWRCB is required to develop a list of impaired water
bodies. Each of the individual RWQCBs are responsible for establishing priority rankings and developing
action plans, referred to as total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) to improve water quality of water
bodies included in the 303(d) list. The Clean Water Act 303(d) listed pollutants in the Coachella Valley
Storm Water Channel and the Salton Sea are shown in Table 4.10-3, 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies.
Table 4.10-3
303(d) Listed Impaired Water Bodies
Water Bo
Distance to
Receiving Water
Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel
Ammonia, DDT, Dieldrin, PCBs, Toxaphene,
7 Miles
Toxicity, Disulfoton, Dissolved Oxygen
Salton Sea
Ammonia, Arsenic, Chloride, Chlorpyrifos,
17 Miles
DDT, Low Dissolved Oxygen, Toxicity
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
Section 402 of the Clean Water Act established the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) to control water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into Waters
of the United States. In the State of California, the EPA has authorized the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) to be the permitting authority to implement the NPDES program. The SWRCB
issues two baseline general permits, one for industrial discharges and one for construction activities
(General Construction Permit). Additionally, the NPDES Program includes the long-term regulation of
storm water discharges from medium and large cities through the MS4 Permit Program.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-4 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Short -Term Storm Water Management
Storm water discharges from construction sites with a disturbed area of one or more acres are required
to either obtain individual NPDES permits for storm water discharges or be covered by a General
Construction Permit. Coverage under the General Construction Permit requires filing a Notice of Intent
with the State Water Resources Control Board and preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP). Each applicant underthe Construction General Permit must ensure that a SWPPP would
be prepared prior to grading and implemented during construction. The primary objective of the
SWPPP is to identify, construct, implement, and maintain Best Management Practices (BMPs) to
reduce or eliminate pollutants in storm water discharges and authorized non -storm water discharges
from the construction site during construction. BMPs include programs, technologies, processes,
practices, and devices that control, prevent, remove, or reduce pollution.
Long -Term Storm Water Management
The stormwater management regulatory requirements for the site include water quality requirements
per the Colorado River Basin Plan and the City of La Quinta Water Quality Ordinance Municipal Code
Section 8.70. The project is considered a redevelopment project that requires Long -Term Post
Construction Stormwater Requirements to reduce the amounts of impervious areas and capture and
treat or infiltrate stormwater runoff.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
Implementation of the General Plan and Zone Change would not increase the risk for adverse
hydrology and water quality impacts above what is identified in the existing General Plan. Potential
hydrology and water quality impacts have been evaluated as part of the evaluation of the proposed
project and would be required to comply with local, state, and federal regulations that provide for the
protection of water quality and flood hazards. With compliance with local, state, and federal
regulations that provide for the protection of water quality and flood hazards, potential hydrology and
water quality impacts associated with the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would be less
than significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality.
The following analysis evaluates if the proposed project would conflict with beneficial uses or further
impair any listed 303(d) Impaired Water Bodies established in the Regional Water Quality Control
Board Basin Plan.
BENEFICIAL USES
The project site is expected to generate pollutants associated with roads, parking areas and
landscaping. Expected pollutants of concern would include bacteria, viruses, nutrients, pesticides,
sediments, trash and debris, oil and grease. During construction, there would be the potential that
degraded surface water runoff generated from the construction site could be conveyed into local
drainage facilities. Depending on the constituents in the surface water, the water quality of the project
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-5 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
area surface water bodies could be reduced, which could conflict with beneficial uses established for
the project area surface water bodies. The proposed project would disturb more than one acre of area
and would, therefore, be required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
State General Construction Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. In accordance with
the State General Construction Permit, the project applicant would be required to file a Notice of Intent
(N01) to the Storm Water Report Tracking System and obtain a waste discharger identification number
from the State Water Resources Control Board. Additionally, the General Construction Permit requires
the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The
SWPPP would identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize degraded surface water runoff
impacts. Such measures would include a site map that shows the construction site perimeter, existing
and proposed buildings, parking areas, roadways, storm drain collection and discharge points before
and after construction. Additionally, structural BMPs placement of such sandbags or waddles near
drainages, use of rumble racks or wheel washers or other measures would be implemented to avoid
sediment transport. Compliance with the NPDES short-term regulatory requirements would reduce
short-term construction related impacts to water quality to a less than significant level.
The long-term operation of the proposed project would generate surface water runoff that could
contain pollutants that could conflict with project area surface water beneficial uses. The proposed
project would be regulated under NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permits issued by the Colorado River
Regional Water Quality Control Board. The proposed project would be required to comply with City of
La Quinta Stormwater Program requirements to reduce the amounts of impervious areas and capture
and treat or infiltrate stormwater runoff. The proposed project would be required to prepare a WQMP
in accordance with the requirements of the non -point source NPDES Permit for Waste Discharge
Requirements. The WQMP prepared for the proposed project would treat onsite low flows with an
onsite bioretention basin. Additionally, non-structural and structural BMP's would be implemented to
maintain water quality. Non-structural BMP's could include education of residents, common area
landscape management, litter control, catch basin inspection, and street and parking lot sweeping.
Structural BMP's could include storm drain system stenciling, design outdoor hazardous material
storage areas to reduce pollutant introduction, and design trash enclosures to reduce pollutant
introduction. Compliance with WQMP non-structural and structural and treatment control measures
would reduce long-term operation impacts to water quality to a less than significant level.
SECTION 303(d) IMPAIRED WATER BODIES
It is unlikely that the construction and operation of the proposed project would generate elevated
levels of pollution constituents shown previously in Table 4.10-3 that would be discharged or conveyed
into the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel or the Salton Sea. During construction, the proposed
project would be required to implement SWPPP in accordance with State Water Resources Control
Board General Construction Permit to maintain water quality. Additionally, non-structural, structural
and treatment control measures would be implemented in accordance with the project Water Quality
Management Plan requirements. Compliance with General Construction Permit requirements in
conjunction with the implementation of the project WQMP would avoid further impairment to
downstream impaired water bodies.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-6 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
No Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the basin.
Water supplies forth e project would be provided by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) from
a combination of groundwater and imported water. The project site underlies the Indio Subbasin. The
Coachella Valley Water District has prepared the Coachella Valley Urban Water Management Plan and
the Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Plan (SGMA)
to manage the supply and demand of surface water and groundwater in the service area. The
groundwater water supplies identified in the Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan, are included in
the groundwater supplies provided in the Coachella Valley Water District Urban Water Management
Plan.
Under the existing General Plan and Zoning Code, a total of 39 single-family units with a minimum lot
size of 72,000 square feet could be developed on the project site. The proposed General Plan
Amendment would increase the density on the project site from Low Density up to 4.0 dwelling units
per acre to Medium/High Density up to 16 dwelling units per acre. The project proposes a density of
9.0 units per acre and the number of residential proposed on the project site would increase from 39
units to 80 units.
Table 4.10-4, Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan and Coachella Valley Water District Urban Water
Management Plan Water Demand, identifies the SGMA Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan and
the Coachella Valley Water District Urban Water Management Plan water demand rates for 39 units
allowed under the Low -Density Single -Family designation and 80 units proposed under the
Medium/High Density designation.
Table 4.10-4
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan and Coachella Valley Water District
Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand
Existing General Plan
Proposed
Water Demand Rate
39 Units Allowed
Project 80 Units
Gallons Per
Land Use
Household Unit
Gallons Per
Gallons Per
Household Unit
Household Unit
Per Day
Per Day
Per Day
Low Density Single -Family
494
19,266
-
Medium/High Density Multiple -Family
170
13,600
Source: 2022 Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-7 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.10-4 shows that the water demands for the proposed 80 residential proposed under the
Medium/High Density Multiple -Family designation would have a lower daily water demand compared
to the 39 units that could be developed under the Low -Density Single -Family designation. The
reduction in water demand would be a result of the cluster residential development common area
landscaping, use of energy efficient water fixtures, minimal turf grass for park/playground area, and
use of decomposed granite for landscaping. The proposed Medium/High Density Multiple -Family land
uses would have approximately 29% less demand compared to the existing General Plan Low Density
land uses planned for the site. The existing General Plan land use water demand is supplied for in the
SGMA Indio Subbasin Groundwater Water Management Plan and the Coachella Valley Water District
Urban Water Management Plan. The reduced water demand generated bythe proposed project would
also be supplied for in the SGMA Indio Subbasin Groundwater Water Management Plan and the
Coachella Valley Water District Urban Water Management Plan. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies nor interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management
of the basin and potential impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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:
1) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the
proposed project would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite. The project
would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. During earthwork
activities, there would be the potential that uncovered soils on the project site could be
exposed to water erosion and/or wind erosion impacts. Additionally, there would be the
potential that construction vehicles and construction equipment could transport sediment
onto local streets and into local drainage systems. The proposed project would disturb more
than one acre of area and would be required to obtain a General Construction Permit from the
State Water Resources Control Board. The General Construction Permit would require
preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to avoid
erosion and sediment transfer impacts. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure
HYDRO-1, potential erosion and sediment transfer impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
HYDRO-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant will obtain coverage under a
General Construction Permit issued from the State Water Resources Control
Board. The General Construction Permit would require the filing of a Notice of
Intent with the State Water Resources Control Board and the preparation of a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-8 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or offsite?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding onsite or offsite. The project site is currently vacant and 100% pervious.
Implementation of the project would result in an increase in impervious area over the current
condition, which would increase the rate of surface water generated from the site. As part of
the improvements for the proposed project, a new storm drain would be constructed to route
flows around and through the project site to an onsite detention basin. The detention basin is
located at the northeast corner of the project site and consists of 26,200 square feet of area.
The maximum depth of the detention basin is 6 feet with the capacity to hold 101,725 cubic
feet of surface water runoff. According to the WQMP prepared for the proposed project, the
proposed drainage system would be able to accommodate increased surface water flows
generated from the project site. With implementation of the project WQMP, the proposed
project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onsite or offsite. Potential
impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
3) 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?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the
proposed project would not exceed the capacity of planned stormwater drainage facilities or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
The project is considered a priority project and would be subject to the surface water
management regulations provided in Chapter 8.70 (Surface Water Management and Discharge
Controls) of the City of La Quinta Municipal Code. The project has prepared a Drainage Plan
that would retain and infiltrate all onsite stormwater runoff. The stormwater runoff from the
site would be conveyed along private drives that would flow into a catch basin located on the
site that would drain into a 26,200 square foot drainage basin where it would infiltrate into the
ground. The project has also prepared a Water Quality Management Plan to minimize
pollutant discharges, and/or accelerated erosion and sediment runoff during construction
and/or post -construction use of the property.
This project incorporates LID/Site Design BMPs to fully address the Municipal Code Treatment
Control BMP requirement. Additionally, the project incorporates the following Site Design
BMPs:
• Preserve natural drainage features and natural depressional storage areas on the site.
• Use natural drainage systems.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-9 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Construct streets, sidewalks, and parking lot aisles to minimum widths necessary,
provided that public safety and a walkable environment for pedestrians are not
compromised.
Reduce widths of streets where off-street parking is available.
• Minimize the use of impervious surfaces, such as decorative concrete, in the
landscape.
Design residential and commercial sites to contain and infiltrate roof runoff, or direct
roof runoff to landscaped swales or buffer areas.
• Incorporate landscaped buffer areas between sidewalks and streets.
With implementation of the proposed project, surface water infiltration basin and Site Design
BMPs, rates of surface water runoff would be reduced and would not create or contribute
runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems. Additionally, during construction, the proposed project would be required to comply
with NPDES General Construction Permit requirements and Municipal Code regulations to
minimize the conveyance of degraded surface water runoff to offsite drainage systems. With
compliance with the project Drainage Plan, WQMP, Municipal Code regulations and NPDES
General Construction Permit requirements, potential water quality impacts would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure HYDRO-1 is required.
4) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not impede
or redirect flood flows. As shown on FEMA FIRM 06065C2263H effective December 3, 2009,
the project site is located in the Zone X area of minimal flood hazard; refer to Figure 4.10-1,
National Flood Hazard Map. As part of the improvements for the proposed project, a new
storm drain would be constructed to route flows around and through the project site to a
bioretention basin. According to the WQMP prepared for the proposed project, the proposed
drainage system would be able to accommodate increased surface waterflows generated from
the project site. With implementation of the project drainage plan, potential flood flow
impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
Less Than Significant Impact: The project would not be in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. According to the City of La Quinta General Plan,
the project site is not susceptible to flooding associated with dam failure, potential inundation from
any stored water body or within a tsunami run up area that would increase the risk for the release of
pollutants. Potential impacts associated with release of pollutants from a flood hazard would be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-10 Hydrology and Water Quality
ational Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette s. FEMA Legend
U 250 500 I'Dw 1,500 2,000 V I •t7,UUU
Basemap: USGS National Map: Orttrnimageryr Data refreshed October, 2020
Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); August 9, 2021.
0- approximate Project Site Boundary
EN
:13 VCS Environmental
5EE FIS REPORT MR nETAlLEn LEGEND AND IN DE MAP FOR FIRM PA LLAYOur
Without Base Flood Aeration {BFEJ
2— A. V. A95
SPECIAL FLOOD With HFE or Depthz .AF. W. Au, yf AR
HAZARD AREAS Regulatory Floodway
0-2%An nuai Chance flood Hazard, Arm
of 1%annual chance flood w& average
depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of legs than one square mile Z..". Y.
�Future Conditions l%Annual
�• Chance Flood Hazard Z-'.•
Area with Reduced FIOW RiSk due to
OTHER ARFAS OF Levee, See Holes. z-, r
FLOOD HAZARD Area with Flood Risk due to Levee zoned
WSMEEa Areaof Minimal Flood Hazard Ze..X
Q Effeedve LOMRs
OTHER ARM Area of Undetermined Flood Hazato m o
GENERAL • • Channel. CulverL or Storm Sewer
STRUCTURES I I if III Levee. Dike, of Floodwall
tte Y0' Cross Sections with 1%AnnualCho nce
n7s Water5urface Elevation
t — — — Coastal Tra heel
—de— Ease Flood Elevation Line (BFE)
um It of study
Jurisdiction Boundary
Coastal Tn3 nsoct Baseline
OTHER profile emellne
FEATURES Hydragra ph lc Feature
Digfta l Data Available
No Digital Data Available
MAP PANELS Unmapped
The pin dlsplayed On the map [son approximate
point selected by the user and does not represent
an authoritative properly location.
This map compiles with FEMA's sla nda rds for the use of
dlgiteI flood maps If It Is not void as described below.
The Imemap shown complie%with FEMA's basemap
accuracy standards
The Hood hara.rd Information Is derived di rattly from the
authometive NFHLweb services provkled by FEMA. This map
Was exported on Big/2021 at 9'a8 PM and doeS not
reflect changes or amendmentssubsequent to this darn and
time. The NfHL and effective Informatlon may change or
become superseded by new data overtime.
This map image is veld it the one or more of the toifowing map
elements do not appear to semap lmagary, Hood zone labels,
legend, scale bar, map creation date, cnmmu nity Identifiers.
FIRM panel num bar. arid FIRM effective date. Map images for
unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot he used for
regulatory purpnsea
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
National Flood Hazard Map
Figure 4.10-1
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with beneficial uses
established for receiving water bodies for the project and would not conflict with water quality
objectives nor further impair existing impaired water bodies. The proposed project would implement
SWPPP, WQMP BMPs and would treat onsite low flows to protect beneficial uses for surface waters
identified in the Colorado River Basin Plan.
In 2014, the California Legislature enacted the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA),
that empowers local agencies to sustainably manage groundwater resources. SGMA requires local
agencies to form groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) for the high and medium priority basins.
GSAs develop and implement groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs) to avoid undesirable results and
mitigate overdraft within 20 years.
The project would receive water supplies from the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin. The project
site specifically underlies the Indio Subbasin. The subbasins have been designated as medium priority.
In 1964, DWR estimated that the Indio Subbasin contained approximately 29.8 million acres feet of
water in the first 1,000 feet below the ground surface, or approximately 76% of the total groundwater
in the Coachella Valley Groundwater Basin. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) has been
designated an "exclusive" General Services Administration (GSA) over its service area for the Indio
Subbasins. The final 2022 Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update was adopted by the GSA in
December 2021.
The Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update demonstrates that despite anticipated climate
changes, the Indio Subbasin GSAs are able to meet forecasted demands under a variety of conditions
and maintain the Indio Subbasin in balance, even increasing groundwater storage over time.
Subsidence and saltwater intrusion have been stopped and are not anticipated to occur during Plan
implementation. As documented in the Management Plan Update, the water supply of the Indio
Subbasin is managed sustainably by the Indio Subbasin GSAs, with ongoing and adaptive management
into the foreseeable future. The Management Plan Update has been developed in collaboration with
groundwater management plans basins and will continue to be coordinated. The GSAs have succeeded
in reversing historical groundwater trends and are currently planning to continue managing the Indio
Subbasin sustainably. This Management Plan demonstrates that the GSAs have the necessary tools to
support effective water management in the region.
The proposed project with its cluster development and common landscaping would have
approximately 29% less demand for water compared to the existing General Plan Low Density land
uses planned for the site. The existing General Plan land use water demand is accounted for in SGMA
Indio Subbasin Groundwater Water Management Plan. Therefore, the reduced water demand
generated by the proposed project would also be accounted for in the SGMA Indio Subbasin
Groundwater Water Management Plan. Implementation of the proposed project would not be
expected to conflict with regional groundwater management strategies nor conflict with the Indio
Subbasin Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan and potential impacts would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.10-12 Hydrology and Water Quality
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.11 Land Use and Planning
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Woroject.
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Apa
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Physically divide an established community?
❑
❑
❑
b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
❑
❑
®
❑
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not divide or create a barrier to
existing communities or result in the development of incompatible land uses. Potential land use
impacts have been evaluated as part of the proposed project and have been evaluated for land use
consistency with adopted General Plan goals, policies, and objectives, as well as with the Zoning Code
standards and requirements to ensure no adverse land use impacts would occur. Potential land use
impacts associated with the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would be less than
significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not physically divide an established
community. The project site is currently undeveloped and situated within a suburban setting that is in
transition from undeveloped land to suburban land uses. The project site is adjacent to residential land
uses to the north and west. The proposed project would develop 80 dwelling units that would be
consistent with surrounding residential land uses and would not result in any adverse land use
compatibility impacts. The project would not divide an established community, would not redirect
traffic through existing residential neighborhoods or would not introduce any physical barriers
between the project site and surrounding area. Additionally, the project would not require acquisition
of private or public lands that would divide existing land uses. Therefore, no impacts would occur in
regard to physically dividing an established community.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not cause a significant
environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The relevant planning documents for the
project would be the City of La Quinta General Plan and Zoning Code. The City of La Quinta General
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.11-1 Land Use and Planning
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Plan and Zoning Map currently designate the project site as Low Density Residential, allowing up to
four dwelling units per acre to be developed. The proposed project involves a General Plan
Amendment that would redesignate the project site from Low Density Residential to Medium/High
Density Residential at 16.0 dwelling units per acre and a Zone Change from Low Density Residential to
Medium/High at 12.0 dwelling units per acre. The maximum amount of dwelling units that could be
developed on the site would be 58 units. The surrounding residential land uses are designated low
density. The project is proposing a residential density of 9.0 dwelling units per acre which would allow
an additional 41 dwelling units to be developed on the project site. The increase in dwelling units on
the project site would not be considered substantial compared to the maximum number of number of
dwelling units that could be developed on the site under the Medium/High designation.
Even though the project is proposing a General Plan Land Use Amendment, the project would still be
required to demonstrate consistency with the General Plan. Table 4.11-1, General Plan Land Use
Consistency, evaluates the consistency with the proposed project with relevant goals and policies from
the City's General Plan.
Table 4.11-1
General Plan Land Use Consistency
General Plan Goal/Policy Consistency Evaluation
Land Use Element
GOAL LU-1: Land use compatibility throughout City.
In accordance with Section 9.60.330 of the City of La
Quinta Zoning Code, the project was required to
prepare and submit a massing plan. The massing plan
depicts the relationship of the structures within the
project site to each other and to development
adjacent to the project and its compatibility with
surrounding development. With preparation and
approval of the massing study, the project would
demonstrate the project design of one- and two-story
units would be consistent with the surrounding single -
story units and would be consistent with Goal LU-1.
The project proposes residential land uses that would
be adjacent to existing residential land uses, as well as
planned residential land uses and would not introduce
incompatible land uses. The project would comply with
Image Corridor requirements by including a 15-foot
landscape setback along Avenue 58 and limiting the
height of structures within 150 feet of Avenue 58 to
under 22 feet, which would be compatible with height
and setback requirements provided for the existing
residential uses located north of Avenue 58. The project
would be setback at an adequate distance to existing
residential areas, where there would be no adverse
operation effects to existing residential areas. The
project would not redirect through existing
neighborhoods or involve any long-term activities that
would affect the quality and integrity of existing
residential neighborhoods. As you enter the proposed
community through its main entrance along Avenue 58,
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.11-2 Land Use and Planning
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
General Plan Goal/Policy
Consistency Evaluation
you will see a one-story recreation building to the west,
along with a large landscaped open space area along the
northern edge of the property which backs up to three
one-story homes, which has been carefully designed to
comply and promote the City's view corridor program.
The lower architectural elements and open space along
the property's northern edge create a viewshed that is
seamless with the northern existing neighborhoods,
thereby illustrating a land use compatibility with well -
established homes. As shown on the attached
Preliminary Site and Landscape Plan, the Corridor View
Figure and Recreation Building Architectural Plans, this
proposed community has been integrated with open
space, as well as amenities to soften and enhance the
views to create a well thought-out and designed
neighborhood. The structures have been tapered from
one-story homes (approximately 18 feet in height) along
the northern edge to two-story homes (approximately
25 feet in height) as the community transitions to the
south. Adjacent land uses to the south, east and west
are planned for single-family residential homes which
again are compatible with the proposed community.
GOAL LU-2: High quality design that compliments and
The proposed project has been designed to promote
enhances the City.
residential amenities and flexibility in design. The
cluster layout of the homes has been designed to
achieve visual diversity and interest in the street scene
through varying setbacks, articulated building masses
or enhanced elevations on residences plotted on
corner lots. The proposed project has been designed to
be visually compatible with similar architectural
elements of Spanish, Mediterranean and Santa Barbara
influences that are common in La Quinta. The project
proposes a minimum of four floor plans, with three
elevations and three color schemes per elevation to
provide aesthetic variety and interest. No identical
single-family detached plan and elevation would be
permitted side -by -side and two houses on either side
of a specific lot would be required to use different
color schemes. The homes would be designed so that
living activities are oriented towards the street with
emphasis on porches, courtyards, entries, and
windows.
The proposed project includes a landscape treatment
program consisting of plants, shrubs, trees and
groundcover, including 15 feet of landscape setback
along Avenue 58 in accordance with the Image Corridor
requirements, which would enhance the streetscape
over its existing condition.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.11-3 Land Use and Planning
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
General Plan Goal/Policy I Consistency Evaluation
Policy LU-2.7: Continue to include park facilities
planning in neighborhood planning efforts.
GOAL LU-3: Safe and identifiable neighborhoods that
provide a sense of place.
GOAL LU-4: Maintenance and protection of existing
neighborhoods.
GOAL LU-5: A broad range of housing types and choices
for all residents of the City.
Policy LU-5.2: Consider changes in market demand in
residential product type to meet the needs of current
and future residents.
Circulation Element
Policy CIR-1.6: Maintain LOS-D operating conditions for
all corridors and intersections unless maintaining this
LOS would, in the City's judgment, be infeasible and/or
conflict with the achievement of other goals.
Program CIR-1.12.c: New development shall provide
pedestrian and bicycle connections to adjacent streets,
and assure that infrastructure and amenities
accommodate pedestrian and bicycle use.
The project includes recreation facilities for its residents
including pool, spa, outdoor seating areas, clubhouse,
and gardens.
The project has been designed as a planned unit
development that would provide open space and
recreation amenities and landscape treatments to
create an identifiable community. The project would
comply with Fire Protection and Police Protection
requirements to ensure safety for its residents.
Similar to the existing residential uses located north of
the project, the proposed project would limit the height
of structures along Highway 58 to less than 22 feet
which would maintain privacy for the existing and
proposed residential uses. The closest two-story homes
to Avenue 58 would be 150 feet and the closest existing
residential uses would be 195 feet. Additionally, the
project proposes a perimeter block wall around the
project which would minimize operational impacts. The
project lighting would be similar to the type and level of
existing lighting provided in the project area and it
would comply with the Municipal Code lighting
requirements which would ensure that all exterior
lighting would be confined to the property to avoid
spillover lighting impacts to adjoining properties. The
project would take access off of Avenue 58 and would
not access through or redirect traffic to existing
residential neighborhoods.
The proposed medium density project would provide an
additional range of housing types in the City.
The project proposes an alternative clustered
residential housing product in lieu of a single-family
dwelling development to help meet the housing needs
of a wide range of household income levels and range
of housing sizes for current and future demands for
housing in the City.
The proposed project would not generate operation
conditions that would not reduce project area roadway
segments or intersections to below LOS D.
The proposed project includes a pedestrian sidewalk
along the private driveway which would provide access
to pedestrian sidewalks and a Class II Bikeway proposed
along Avenue 58.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.11-4 Land Use and Planning
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
General Plan Goal/Policy Consistency Evaluation 111` 4"
Policy CIR-1.14: Private streets shall be developed in
accordance with development standards set forth in the
Municipal Code, relevant Public Works Bulletins and
other applicable standards and guidelines.
Policy CIR-1.17: In orderto preserve the aesthetic values
on the City's streets, optimum landscape setbacks shall
be maintained along all designated General Plan Image
Corridors and shall be identified in the City's Municipal
Code.
Livable Community Element
Policy SC-1.3: Encourage the use of more
environmentally friendly storm water management
techniques such as bioswales, permeable surfaces and
other methods as they are developed, in all new
development.
Program SC-1.4.a: Require all new development
proposals to demonstrate consistency with the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan.
Program SC-1.5.a: All new development shall be
constructed to meet or exceed CalGreen Building Codes.
Program SC-1.5.c: New development projects shall
include vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle connections to
the greatest extent possible, both through the project
and connecting to adjacent projects.
Housing Element
GOAL H-1: Provide housing opportunities that meet the
diverse needs of the City's existing and projected
population.
Policy H-1.4: Support the construction of new affordable
housing by rezoning, where appropriate and desirable,
to permit higher density residential development.
Policy H-6.1: Promote higher density and compact
developments that increase energy efficiency and
reduce land consumption.
Air Quality Element
Policy AQ-1.5: Ensure all construction activities minimize
emissions of all air quality pollutants.
Policy AQ-1.6: Proposed development air quality
emissions of criteria pollutants shall be analyzed under
CEQA.
The project will coordinate with the City to ensure that
private streets are designed and constructed to meet
City standards.
The project includes a 15-foot landscape setback behind
the right-of-way along Avenue 58, which is identified as
a General Plan Image Corridor.
The project proposes Light Impact Development/Site
Design Drainage Concepts and Treatment Controls as
part of the project WQMP.
The project evaluated Greenhouse Gas emissions and
determined that the project contributions would be less
than significant.
The project will coordinate with the City to ensure the
project complies with CALGreen Building Code
requirements.
The proposed project includes a pedestrian sidewalk
along the private driveway which would provide access
to pedestrian sidewalks and a Class II Bikeway proposed
along Avenue 58.
The project proposes an alternative clustered
residential housing product in lieu of a single-family
dwelling development to help meet the housing needs
of a wide range of household income levels and range
of housing sizes for the current and future demands for
housing in the City.
The proposed project includes a General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change from Low Density to
Medium Density which would allow for 4 ladditional
residential units to be developed on the site.
The proposed project includes a General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change from Low Density to
Medium Density, which would result in more units on
less land.
The project IS/MND evaluates short-term construction
related air quality impacts and determined that
construction air quality impacts would be less than
significant.
The project IS/MND Air Quality Assessment evaluates
the generation of criteria pollutants and has determined
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.11-5 Land Use and Planning
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
General Plan Goal/Policy I Consistency Evaluation MW
Policy AQ-1.7: Greenhouse gas emissions associated
with a development project shall demonstrate
adherence to the City's GHG Reduction Plan.
Biological Resources Element
Policy BIO-1.4: Comply with the requirements of the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).
Cultural Resources Element
Program CUL-1.1.a: Any development application for a
vacant site, or a site previously or currently used for
agricultural purposes, shall be accompanied by a Phase
I archaeological and/or historic analysis conducted by a
qualified archaeologist. Such analysis shall be paid for by
the project proponent.
Water Resources Element
Program WR-1.4.c: Require onsite retention for new
development projects to the greatest extent possible, to
provide added recharge of the aquifer.
Environmental Hazards (Safety Element)
Policy N-1.2: New residential development located
adjacent to any roadway identified in Table IV-4 as
having a build out noise level more than 65 dBA shall
continue to be required to submit a noise impact
analysis in conjunction with the first Planning
Department application, which demonstrates
compliance with the City's noise standards.
Policy N-1.5: All noise impact analysis will include, at a
minimum, short-term construction noise and noise
generated by the daily operation of the project at build
out.
Policy GEO-1.2: The City shall continue to require that
development in areas subject to rockfall, landslide,
liquefaction and/or other geotechnical hazards
described in this Element, prepare detailed geotechnical
analyses that include mitigation measures intended to
reduce potential hazards to less than significant levels.
Program FH-1.3.a: New development shall continue to
be required to construct onsite retention/detention
basins and other necessary stormwater management
facilities that are capable of managing 100-year
stormwater flows.
that construction and operational air quality impacts
would be less than significant.
The project IS/MND Greenhouse Gas Study evaluated
the consistency of the project with the City's GHG
Reduction Plan and determined it adheres to the GHG
Reduction Plan.
The project IS/MND Biological Study evaluated potential
conflicts with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and
identified measures to avoid impacts to migratory birds.
The project site was a former date palm orchard. The
project IS/MND includes a Phase 1 Archeological/
Historic Assessment.
The project Drainage Plan proposes a bioretention basin
to capture stormwater runoff and infiltrate it into the
ground water basin.
The IS/MND includes a Noise Study which evaluates
traffic noise impacts and has determined that traffic
noise impacts would be less than significant.
The project IS/MND includes a Noise Study which
evaluates short-term construction and long-term
operational noise impacts and determined that noise
impacts would be less than significant.
The project IS/MND includes a Geotechnical Study that
evaluates landslide, liquefaction and other geotechnical
constraints and has determined that potential geologic
and soil impacts would be less than significant.
The project Drainage Plan proposes a bioretention basin
to capture stormwater runoff and infiltrate it into the
ground water basin.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.11-6 Land Use and Planning
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
General Plan Goal/Policy
Consistency Evaluation
Policy ES-1.2: New development proposals shall
The IS/MND evaluates potential impacts to fire
continue to be routed to the Fire Department to assure
protection and determined potential impacts would be
that project access and design provide for maximum fire
less than significant. Additionally, through site plan
and life safety.
review, the City would ensure the project complies with
all required fire standards and requirements.
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
With approval of the General Plan Amendment, the proposed project would not conflict with the
General Plan land use density. As demonstrated above, the proposed project would be consistent with
relevant policies from the City of La Quinta and would contribute to meeting the City's RHNA
requirements. The approval of the proposed project would not substantially conflict with any land use
plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
within the City. Potential land use impacts would be less than significant.
CITY OF LA QUINTA ZONING CODE
Table 4.11-2, Residential Planned Unit Development Standards, is a comparison of the site
development standards for the proposed Medium Density Residential Zone Change and the site
development standards proposed by the project with the proposed PUD. Through the PUD process,
the project is proposing to reduce minimum lot area, front yard setback, rear yard setback, side yard
setback and increase the maximum lot coverage.
Table 4.11-2
Residential Planned Unit Development Standards
Development Criteria
RM
A.
Lot Size
Minimum lot size (square feet)
7,200
3,600
2,310
Minimum Lot Frontage (feet)
60
40
33
B.
Building Placement
Front Yard Setback (feet)
20
20
0
Rear Yard (feet)
20
15
7.5
Interior/Exterior Side Yard Rear Yard (feet)
5/10
5/10
3/5
C.
Building Size and Massing
Maximum Lot Coverage
50%
60
66%
Maximum Building Height (feet)
28
28
28
D.
Landscaping
Required Landscaping (%)
10/20
(first number
equals minimum at
any point; second
number equals
minimum average
over entire
frontage)
10/20
(first number
equals minimum at
any point; second
number equals
minimum average
over entire
frontage)
30%
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.11-7 Land Use and Planning
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Presently, the zoning on the project site is Low Density Residential. To ensure consistency between
the proposed project and the City of La Quinta Zoning Map, the Zoning Map would be amended to
Medium High Density Residential for the project site. In accordance with Section 9.220.020 of the
Zoning Code, the following findings shall be made by the City Council prior to the approval of the
Zone change request:
1. Consistency with General Plan goals, policies, and objectives.
As shown in Table 4.11-1, the proposed project would be consistent with relevant policies from
the General Plan.
2. Approval will not create conditions materially detrimental to public health, safety, and general
welfare.
The IS/MND prepared for the proposed project evaluated potential environmental effects that
could potentially cause adverse impacts on the environment and human beings and
determined that with the incorporation of mitigation measures all potential impacts would be
less than significant.
3. Compatible with zoning on adjacent land uses.
The surrounding residential land uses adjacent to the site are Low Density Residential and
Neighborhood Commercial. Across from Avenue 58, the area is also zoned Low Density
Residential. Under the Low -Density Residential zoning, projects with clustered smaller
dwellings, such as one-story and two-story single-family attached, townhome or
condominium dwellings are permitted.
The proposed Zone Change would rezone the project site to Medium Density Residential at a
density of 12.0 dwelling units per acre that would develop a small lot cluster development. The
project would be compatible with and could be served by Neighborhood Commercial land uses
planned for the area.
The proposed project would have a higher density, but the housing type that would be
developed on the project site would be consistent with the types of housing allowed under the
Low Density Residential Zoning. To enhance compatibility with adjacent land uses, the project
would comply with Image Corridor requirements by including a 15-foot landscape setback
along Avenue 58 and limiting the height of structures within 150 feet of Avenue 58, to a 22-
foot height requirement which would be compatible with the height and setback requirements
provided for the existing residential uses located north of Avenue 58. The project would be
setback at an adequate distance to existing residential areas, where there would be no adverse
operation effects to existing residential areas.
4. Proposed zoning is suitable and appropriate for the property.
The project site is currently zoned Low Density Residential. No change of use is proposed, only
an increase in residential density from 2.0 to 4.0 units per acre to 8.0 to 12.0 units per acre.
The project infrastructure plan and studies identify that the project could support the
increased residential density without any significant adverse effects.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.11-8 Land Use and Planning
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
5. Approval of the zone change is warranted because general conditions of the property have
changed since the existing zoning was imposed.
The property is currently zoned Low Density Residential. Over the last few years, California has
experienced an unprecedented, severe, and well -documented housing shortage. California
Senate Bill 330 (SB 330), "The Housing Crisis Act of 2019," was signed into law by Governor
Newsom on October 9, 2019 and became effective January 1, 2020. SIB 330 establishes a
statewide housing emergency to be in effect until January 1, 2030 and acknowledges California
is experiencing a housing supply crisis, with housing demand far outstripping supply. California
needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth,
and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over the next 7 years. The
proposed zone change would increase the amounts of units currently allowed under the
current zoning and would be warranted in response to the State of California's current need
for additional housing.
Zoning Code Consistency Determination
As shown above, the project would support the required Zone Change findings provided in Section
9.220.020 of the Zoning Code. Upon adoption of the proposed Zone Change, the project would be
consistent with the La Quinta Municipal Code and Zoning Map. Impacts would be less than significant
in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.11-9 Land Use and Planning
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.12 Mineral Resources
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
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?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not 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 or result
in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site.
RESIDENTIAL 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?
No Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not 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. The City
of La Quinta General Plan identifies that the project is located in an area that is designated MRZ-1,
areas where geologic information indicates that little likelihood exists for the presence of significant
mineral resources. The project site is not planned for mineral resource extraction and has not
historically been associated with mineral resources. Therefore, there would be no impacts to mineral
resources.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not 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. As discussed above, no known valuable mineral resources exist within or near the
project site, and no mineral resource extraction activities occur on the site. According to the City of La
Quinta General Plan, the project site is not identified as a locally important mineral resource recovery
site delineated on a local general, specific plan, or other land use plan. Therefore, the proposed project
would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.12-1 Mineral Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.13 Noise
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project result in:ilk
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards 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?
The following analysis is based on a Noise Impact Analysis prepared by Vista Environmental in October
2021. The report is presented in its entirety in Appendix G.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Background
NOISE LEVELS
Noise level (or volume) is generally measured in decibels (dB) using the A -weighted sound pressure
level (dBA). The A -weighting scale is an adjustment to the actual sound pressure levels to be consistent
with that of human hearing response, which is most sensitive to frequencies around 4,000 Hertz (about
the highest note on a piano) and less sensitive to low frequencies (below 100 Hertz). Sound pressure
level is measured on a logarithmic scale with the 0 B level based on the lowest detectable sound
pressure level that people can perceive (an audible sound that is not zero sound pressure level). Based
on the logarithmic scale, a doubling of sound energy is equivalent to an increase of three dBA, and a
sound that is 10 dBA less than the ambient sound level has no effect on ambient noise. Because of the
nature of the human ear, a sound must be about 10 dBA greater than the reference sound to bejudged
as twice as loud. In general, a three dBA change in community noise levels is noticeable, while a one
to two dB change is generally not perceived. Quiet suburban areas typically have noise levels in the
range of 40-50 dBA, while arterial streets are in the 50-60+ dBA range.
SOUND ATTENUATION
Noise levels typically attenuate (or drop off) at a rate of six dBA per doubling of distance from point
sources (i.e., industrial machinery). Additionally, noise levels may also be reduced by intervening
structures. Generally, a single row of buildings between the receptor and the noise source reduces the
noise level by about five dBA, while a solid wall or berm reduces noise levels by approximately seven
dBA. The manner in which older homes in California were constructed (approximately 30 years old or
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-1 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
older) generally provides a reduction of exterior -to -interior noise levels of about 20 to 25 dBA with
closed windows. The exterior -to -interior sound reduction of newer residential units and office
buildings constructed to California Energy Code standards is generally 30 dBA or more (Harris, Miller,
Miller and Hanson, 2006).
NOISE METRICS
One of the most frequently used noise metrics that considers both duration and sound power level is
the equivalent noise level (Leq). The Leq is defined as the single steady A -weighted level that is
equivalent to the same amount of energy as that contained in the actual fluctuating levels over a period
of time (essentially, the average noise level). Typically, Leq is summed over a one -hour period. Lmax is
the highest RMS (root mean squared) sound pressure level within the measuring period, and Lmin is
the lowest RMS sound pressure level within the measuring period. The time period in which noise
occurs is also important since noise that occurs at night tends to be more disturbing than that which
occurs during the day. Community noise is usually measured using Day -Night Average Level (Ldn),
which is the 24-hour average noise level with a 10 dBA penalty for noise occurring during nighttime
(10:00 PM to 7:00 AM) hours, or Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), which is the 24-hour
average noise level with a five dBA penalty for noise occurring from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM and a 10 dBA
penalty for noise occurring from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Noise levels described by Ldn and CNEL usually
do not differ by more than one dB. Daytime Leq levels are louder than Ldn or CNEL levels; thus, if the
Leq meets noise standards, the Ldn and CNEL are also met.
Regulatory Framework
FEDERAL NOISE CONTROL ACT
The Federal Noise Control Act (1972) addressed the issue of noise as a threat to human health and
welfare. To implement the Federal Noise Control Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
undertook a number of studies related to community noise in the 1970s. The EPA found that 24-hour
averaged noise levels less than 70 dBA would avoid measurable hearing loss. Levels of less than 55 dBA
outdoors and 45 dBA indoors would prevent activity interference and annoyance (EPA 1972). The U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published a Noise Guidebook for use in
implementing the Department's noise policy. In general, HUD's goal is exterior noise levels that are
less than or equal to 55 dBA Ldn. The goal for interior noise levels is 45 dBA Ldn.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulates noise of aircraft and airports. Surface
transportation system noise is regulated by a host of agencies, including the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA), which regulates transit noise, while freeways that are part of the interstate
highway system are regulated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Although the proposed
project is not under the jurisdiction of the FTA, the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
Manual (FTA Manual), prepared by the FTA, September 2018, is the only guidance document from a
government agency that provides guidance on construction noise and recommends developing
construction noise criteria on a project -specific basis that utilizes local noise ordinances if possible.
However, local noise ordinances will usually relate to nuisance and hours of allowed activity and
sometimes specify limits in terms of maximum levels, but are generally not practical for assessing the
noise impacts of a construction project. Project construction noise criteria should take into account
the existing noise environment, the absolute noise levels during construction activities, the duration
of the construction, and the adjacent land uses. The FTA standards are based on extensive studies by
the FTA and other governmental agencies on the human effects and reaction to noise and a summary
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-2 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
of the FTA findings for a detailed construction noise assessment are provided below in Table 4.13-1,
Federal Transit Administration Construction Noise Criteria.
Table 4.13-1
Federal Transit Administration Construction Noise Criteria
Land Use
Day (dBA Leq(8-hour))
Night (dBA Leg(8-hour))
30-day Average (dBA Ldn)
Residential
80
70
75
Commercial
85
85
80(1)
Industrial
90
90
85(1)
Notes:
(1) Use a 24-hour Leq (24 hour) instead of Ldn (30 day).
Source: Vista Environmental, Noise Impact Analysis; October 19, 2021.
STATE
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) establishes standards governing interior noise levels
that apply to all new single-family and multiple -family residential units in California. These standards
require that acoustical studies be performed before construction at building locations where the
existing Ldn exceeds 60 dBA. Such acoustical studies are required to establish mitigation measures that
will limit maximum Ldn levels to 45 dBA in any habitable room. Although there are no generally
applicable interior noise standards pertinent to all uses, many communities in California have adopted
a Ldn of 45 as an upper limit on interior noise in all residential units.
In addition, the State of California General Plan Guidelines (OPR 2003), provides guidance for noise
compatibility. The guidelines also present adjustment factors that may be used to arrive at noise
acceptability standards that reflect the noise control goals of the community, the particular
community's sensitivity to noise, and the community's assessment of the relative importance of noise
pollution.
LOCAL
The City of La Quinta General Plan 2035 (General Plan), adopted February 19, 2013, and Municipal
Code establishes the following applicable policies related to noise and vibration.
La Quinta General Plan
The following applicable goals and policies to the proposed project are from Chapter IV Environmental
Hazards Element of the General Plan:
Policy N-1.1: Noise standards in the City shall be consistent with the Community Noise and Land
Use Compatibility scale described in this Element.
Policy N-1.2: New residential development located adjacent to any roadway identified in Table
IV-4 as having a build out noise level in excess of 65 dBA shall continue to be
required to submit a noise impact analysis in conjunction with the first Planning
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-3 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Department application, which demonstrates compliance with the City's noise
standards.
Policy N-1.5: All noise impact analysis will include, at a minimum, short-term construction noise
and noise generated by the daily operation of the project at build out.
Policy N-1.6: The City may require remedial noise control plans and/or improvements for areas
experiencing noise in excess of adopted City standards.
Policy N-1.7: Noise impact analysis shall be included in all City Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
and developer -required roadway widening projects to demonstrate compliance
with City noise standards.
City of La Quinta Municipal Code
The City of La Quinta Municipal Code establishes the following applicable standards related to noise
and vibration.
6.08.050 —Disturbance by Construction Noises
A. It is a nuisance, and it is unlawful, for any person to be engaged or employed, or for any person
to cause any other person to be engaged or employed, in any work of construction, erection,
alteration, repair, addition to, or improvement to realty, except between the hours set forth
as follows:
Table 4.13-2
Federal Transit Administration Construction Noise Criteria
Season
Days of Week
ime
October 15t through April 30th
Monday -Friday
7:00 AM to 5:30 PM
Saturday
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM
Sunday
None
Holidays*
None
May 15t through September 30th
Monday -Friday
6:00 AM to 7:00 PM
Saturday
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
Sunday
None
Holidays*
None
Notes:
* For purposes of this section, the following shall be considered Holidays:
New Year's Day (January 15t)
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Day (third Monday in January)
President's Day (third Monday in February formerly Washington's
birthday)
Memorial Day (last Monday in May)
Independence Day (July 41h)
Labor Day (first Monday in September)
Veteran's Day (November 111h)
Thanksgiving (fourth Thursday in November)
Christmas (December 25th)
Source: 6.08.050 of the Municipal Code.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-4 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B. No person doing or causing work prohibited by subsection A of this section, after being
informed orally or in writing that the work is in violation of subsection A, shall fail, refuse or
neglect to cease said work.
Exceptions:
1. Emergency repair of existing installations or equipment or appliances;
2. Construction work complying with the terms of a written early work permit which may be
issued by the city manager or designee, upon a showing of sufficient need due to hot or
inclement weather, or the use of an unusually long process material, or other
circumstances of unusual and compelling nature.
9.60.220 — Noise Control
Residential land uses shall comply with the noise control standards set forth in Section 9.100.210.
9.100.210 — Noise Control
A. Purpose. The noise control standards for nonresidential land use districts set forth in this
section are established to prevent excessive sound levels which are detrimental to the public
health, welfare and safety or which are contrary to the public interest.
B. Noise Standards. Exterior noise standards are set forth below. Residential property, schools,
hospitals and churches are considered noise sensitive land uses, regardless of the land use
district in which they are located. All other uses shall comply with the "other nonresidential"
standard. All noise measurements shall be taken using standard noise measuring instruments.
Measurements shall be taken within the receiving property locations determined by the
director to be most appropriate to the individual situation.
Table 4.13-3
City of La Quinta Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments
unity Noise Equivalent LevelEL)
Land Uses
50 1 55 1 60 1 65 1 70 1 75 1 80
C
Residential Single -Family Dwellings, Duplex, Mobile Homes
A
C
I
Chart Legend:
A- Normally Acceptable: With no special noise reduction requirements assuming standard construction.
B - Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise
reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
C - Normally Unacceptable: New construction is discouraged. If new construction does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise
reduction requirement is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
D - Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.
Source: Section 9.100.210(B) of the Municipal Code.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-5 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.13-4
City of La Quinta Exterior Noise Standards
Receiving Land Use Noise Standard
Time Period
65 dB(A)
7NiseSensitive
7:00 AM —10:00 PM
50 dB(A)
10:00 PM — 7:00 AM
75 dB(A)
7:00 AM —10:00 PM
Other Nonresidential
65 dB(A)
10:00 PM — 7:00 AM
Source: section 9.100.210(5) of the Municipal Code.
If the noise consists entirely of impact noise, simple tone noise, speech or music, or any
combination thereof, each of the noise levels specified in the table in this section shall be
reduced by five (5) dB(A).
C. Noise Limits. It is unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise, or
to allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled
by such person, when such noise causes the noise level, when measured on any adjacent
property to exceed:
1. The noise standard for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any
hour;
2. The noise standard plus five (5) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15)
minutes in any hour;
3. The noise standard plus ten (10) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than five (5)
minutes in any hour;
4. The noise standard plus fifteen (15) dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than one (1)
minute in any hour; or
5. The noise standard plus twenty (20) dB(A) for any period of time.
For purposes of this section, the term "cumulative period" means the number of minutes that
a noise occurs within any hour, whether such minutes are consecutive or not.
D. Ambient Noise Level. If the ambient or background noise level exceeds any of the preceding
noise categories, no increase above such ambient noise level shall be permitted.
E. Exemptions. The following are exempt from the noise restrictions of this section:
1. Emergency vehicles or other emergency operations.
2. City maintenance, construction or similar activities.
3. Construction activities regulated by Section 6.08.050 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
4. Golf course maintenance activities between 5:30 a.m. and ending no later than 8:00
p.m. on any given day.
9.100.220 — Operational Standards
All uses and developed properties within any nonresidential district shall comply with the following
standards for development, operation and maintenance.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-6
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
F. Vibration. No use except a temporary construction operation shall be permitted which
generates inherent and recurrent ground vibration perceptible, without instruments, at the
boundary of the lot on which the use is located.
Existing Noise Setting
The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site would be a home at 58300 Almonte Drive that is
located as near as 12 feet west of the project site. There are also single-family homes located on the
north side of Avenue 58 that are as near as 100 feet north of the project site. The nearest school is
Westside Elementary School, which is located as near as 0.9 miles northeast of the project site.
To determine the existing noise levels, noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the project
site. The noise monitoring locations were selected to obtain noise levels in the vicinity of the project
site. Descriptions of the noise monitoring sites are provided in Table 4.13-5, Existing (Ambient) Noise
Measurement Results, and are shown in Figure 4.13-1, Field Noise Monitoring Locations.
Table 4.13-5
Existing (Ambient) Noise Measurement Results
Site
Average
Maximum
(dBA Leg1-hour/Time)
Average
Site Description
Minimum
Maximum
No
(dBA Leg
(dBA Lmax )
(dBA CNEL)
Located on the northern portion of the
project site on a power pole,
64.9
A
approximately 60 feet south of the
58.2
85.1
63.2
Avenue 58 centerline and 110 feet west
AM
2:AM
7:09 AM
of Via Pasatiempo.
Located west of the project site on a palm
tree, approximately 40 feet south of the
44.2
70.6
B
Avenue 58 centerline and 150 feet east of
65.7
93.5
3:28 AM
1:25 PM
69.4
the Almonte Drive centerline.
Note: Noise measurements were taken with two Extech Model 407780 Type 2 sound level meters from Monday, September 6,
2021, to Tuesday, September 7, 2021.
Source: Vista Environmental, Noise Impact Analysis; October 19, 2021.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase population and associated
traffic generated from the project site above the level identified in the existing General Plan which
could increase operational noise levels and long-term traffic noise levels above levels currently
estimated in the existing General Plan. The Noise Impact Analysis prepared for the project evaluated
potential increased operational noise and increased noise impacts associated with increased traffic
trips and determined that potential noise impacts would be less than significant. Potential noise
impacts associated with the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would be less than significant.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-7 Noise
F
}
L
LEGEND
_ 4 B Noise Measurement Location
Source: Vista Environmental; October 2021.
approximate Project Site Boundary
e
LAVILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Field Noise Monitoring Locations
VCS Environmental Figure 4.13-1
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would generate
construction noise impacts and long-term operation noise impacts. Construction noise estimates are
based upon noise levels reported by the FTA, Office of Planning and Environment, and the distance to
nearby sensitive receptors. Reference noise levels from that document were used to estimate noise
levels at nearby sensitive receptors based on a standard noise attenuation rate of 6 dB per doubling
of distance. The long-term operation noise associated with the proposed project would be traffic
related. A noticeable increase would be 3 dBA Leq which would require a doubling of peak hour traffic
volumes.
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION NOISE IMPACTS
The noise impacts from construction of the proposed project have been analyzed through use of the
FHWA's Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM). Table 4.13-6, Construction Equipment Noise
Emissions and Usage Factors, provides a list of the construction equipment anticipated to be used for
each phase of construction that was obtained from the Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact
Analysis Tentative Tract Map No. 37950 Project (Air Quality Analysis), prepared by Vista Environmental,
October 28, 2021, for the proposed project.
Table 4.13-6
Construction Equipment Noise Emissions and Usage Factors
Equipment Description
Number of
Equipment
Acoustical l Use
Factors U
Spec 721.560 Lmax
at 50 feet2
(dBA, slow3)
Actual Measured
Lmax at 50 feet'
(dBA, slow')
Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers
3
40
85
82
Tractor, Loader, or Backhoes
4
40
84
N/A
Grading
Excavators
1
40
85
81
Grader
1
40
85
83
Rubber Tired Dozer
1
40
85
82
Tractor, Loader, or Backhoes
3
40
85
82
Building Construction
Crane
1
16
85
81
Forklift (Gradall)
3
40
85
83
Generator
1
50
82
81
Tractor, Loader or Backhoes
3
40
84
N/A
Welder
1
40
73
74
Paving
Paver
2
50
85
77
Paving Equipment
2
50
85
77
Roller
2
20
85
80
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-9
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Number of
er of
Acoustical Use
Spec 721.560 Lmax
Actual Measured
Equipment Description
Equipment
Factor' %
( )
at 50 feet2
Lmax at 50 feet4
OL
(dBA, slow')
(dBA, slow')
Architectural Coating
Air Compressor
1
40
80
78
Notes:
1 Acoustical use factor is the percentage of time each piece of equipment is operational during a typical workday.
2 Spec 721.560 is the equipment noise level utilized by the RCNM program.
3 The "slow" response averages sound levels over 1-second increments. A "fast" response averages sound levels over 0.125-
second increments.
4 Actual Measured is the average noise level measured of each piece of equipment during the Central Artery/Tunnel project in
Boston, Massachusetts primarily during the 1990s.
Reference: Federal Highway Administration, 2006 and CaIEEMod default equipment mix.
Source: Vista Environmental, Noise Impact Analysis; October 19, 2021.
CONSTRUCTION -RELATED NOISE
The construction activities for the proposed project are anticipated to include site preparation and
grading of the 9.7-acre project site, building construction of the 80 single-family homes, paving of the
onsite roads and road improvements to Avenue 58 and application of the architectural coatings. Noise
impacts from construction activities associated with the proposed project would be a function of the
noise generated by construction equipment, equipment location, sensitivity of nearby land uses, and
the timing and duration of the construction activities. The nearest sensitive receptor is a home at
58300 Almonte Drive that is located as near as 12 feet west of the project site. There are also single-
family homes located on the north side of Avenue 58 that are as near as 100 feet north of the project
site.
Section 9.100.210(E)(3) of the City's Municipal Code exempts construction noise from the City noise
standards provided construction activities adhere to the construction noise disturbance limits
provided in Section 6.08.050 of the Municipal Code, that limits the allowable times construction may
occur. However, the City construction noise standards do not provide any limits to the noise levels that
may be created from construction activities and even with adherence to the City standards, the
resultant construction noise levels could result in a significant substantial temporary noise increase to
the nearby residents.
To determine if the proposed construction activities would create a significant substantial temporary
noise increase, the FTA construction noise criteria thresholds have been utilized, which shows that a
significant construction noise impact would occur if construction noise exceeded 80 dBA during the
daytime at any of the nearby homes. Table 4.13-6 shows the anticipated construction equipment for
each construction phase. The results are shown below in Table 4.13-7, Construction Noise Levels at the
Nearest Sensitive Receptors, and the RCNM printouts are provided in Appendix C of Appendix G, Noise
Impact Analysis, prepared for the project.
Table 4.13-7 shows that the greatest noise impacts would occur during the building construction
phase, with a noise level as high as 69 dBA Leq at the nearest home to the west. Table 4.13-7 also
shows that none of the construction phases would exceed the FTA noise standard of 80 dB at the
nearby homes. Therefore, through adherence to the limitation of allowable construction times
provided in Section 6.08.050 of the Municipal Code, construction -related noise levels would not
exceed any standards established in the General Plan or Noise Ordinance nor would construction
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-10 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
activities create a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels from construction of the
proposed project. Impacts would be less than significant.
Table 4.13-7
Construction Noise Levels at the Nearest Sensitive Receptors
Construction Phase
Construction Noise Level (dBA Leq) at:
Nearest Home
to the West'
Nearest Homes
to the North
Site Preparation
68
67
Grading
68
67
Building Construction
69
68
Paving
63
62
Painting
55
54
FTA Construction Noise Threshold
80
80
Exceed Thresholds?
No
No
Notes:
1 The nearest home to the west is located as near as 410 feet from the center of the project site.
z The nearest homes to the north are located as near as 460 feet from the center of the project site.
3 The FTA Construction noise thresholds are detailed above in Table 4.13-1.
Reference: RCNM, Federal Highway Administration, 2006.
Source: Vista Environmental, Noise Impact Analysis; October 19, 2021.
LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL NOISE IMPACTS
The proposed project would consist of the development of 80 detached single-family homes. Potential
noise impacts associated with the operations of the proposed project would be from project -
generated vehicular traffic on the nearby roadways. In addition, the proposed development would be
adjacent to Avenue 58, which may create exterior and interior noise levels in excess of City standards
at the proposed homes. The noise impacts to the nearby existing homes and proposed homes have
been analyzed separately below.
ROADWAY VEHICULAR NOISE IMPACTTO NEARBY HOMES
Vehicle noise is a combination of the noise produced by the engine, exhaust, and tires. The level of
traffic noise depends on three primary factors: (1) the volume of traffic, (2) the speed of traffic, and
(3) the number of trucks in the flow of traffic. The proposed project does not propose any uses that
would require a substantial number of truck trips and the proposed project would not alter the speed
limit on any existing roadway so the proposed project's potential offsite noise impacts have been
focused on the noise impacts associated with the change of volume of traffic that would occur with
development of the proposed project.
Since the General Plan does not quantify what is a significant roadway noise increase, the roadway
noise threshold utilized in the General Plan Draft EIR has been utilized, which details that a significant
noise increase would occur when the traffic noise increases by 3 dBA CNEL.
The potential offsite traffic noise impacts created by the on -going operations of the proposed project
have been analyzed through utilization of the FHWA model. The noise calculation spreadsheets are
provided in Appendix D of the Noise Impact Analysis. The proposed project's potential offsite traffic
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-11 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
noise impacts have been analyzed forth e existing year (year 2021) and future year 2035 scenarios that
are discussed separately below.
Existing Year Conditions
The proposed project's potential offsite traffic noise impacts have been calculated through a
comparison of the Existing scenario to the Existing with Project scenario. The results of this comparison
are shown in Table 4.13-8, Existing Project Traffic Noise Contributions.
Table 4.13-8 shows that the proposed project's permanent noise increases to the nearby homes from
the generation of additional vehicular traffic would not exceed the 3 dBA traffic noise increase
threshold. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels for the existing conditions. Impacts would be less than significant.
Table 4.13-8
Existing Project Traffic Noise Contributions
dBA CNEL at Nearest Receptor'
Exceed +3
Roadway
Segment
Existing Plus Project
dBA CNEL
Existing2
Project Contribution
Threshold
Avenue 58
Madison Street to Monroe Street
56.5
57.2
0.7
No
Notes:
1 Distance to nearest sensitive receptors shown in Table G of the Noise Impact Analysis, does not take into account
existing noise
barriers.
2 +3 dBA Increase Threshold obtained from General Plan DEIR, 2013.
Reference: FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model FHWA-RD-77-108.
Source: Vista Environmental, Noise Impact Analysis; October 19, 2021.
Future Year 2035 Conditions
The proposed project's potential offsite traffic noise impacts have been calculated through a
comparison of the future year 2035 scenario to the future year 2035 with project scenario. The results
of this comparison are shown in Table 4.13-9, Future Year 2035 Project Traffic Noise Contributions.
Table 4.13-9
Future Year 2035 Project Traffic Noise Contributions
dBA CNEL at Nearest Receptor'
Exceed +3
Roadway
Segment
Year 2035
Project
dBA CNEL
-16
Year 2035
Plus Project
Contribution
Threshold
Avenue 58
Madison Street to Monroe Street
63.2
63.3
0.1
No
Notes:
i Distance to nearest sensitive receptors shown in Table G of the Noise Impact Analysis, does not take into account existing noise
barriers.
2 +3 dBA Increase Threshold obtained from General Plan DEIR, 2013.
Reference: FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model FHWA-RD-77-108.
Source: Vista Environmental, Noise Impact Analysis; October 19, 2021.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-12 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.13-9 shows that the proposed project's permanent noise increases to the nearby homes from
the generation of additional vehicular traffic would not exceed the traffic noise increase thresholds
detailed above. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase
in ambient noise levels for the future year 2035 conditions. Impacts would be less than significant.
ROADWAY VEHICULAR NOISE IMPACTS TO PROPOSED HOMES
The proposed project would consist of the development of a residential community with 80 detached
single-family homes. General Plan Policy N-1.2 requires that the noise level at new residential
developments that are adjacent to a roadway to not exceed 65 dBA CNEL. It is anticipated that the
primary source of noise impacts to the project site would be traffic noise from Avenue 58 that is
adjacent to the north side of the project site. The anticipated noise levels have been calculated for
backyards that are adjacent to Avenue 58 for representative lots and the results are shown below in
Table 4.13-10, Proposed Homes Exterior Noise Levels from Avenue 58.
Table 4.13-10
Proposed Homes Exterior Noise Levels from Avenue 58
Building
W,
Exterior Noise Levels (dBA CNEL)
Sound Wall Height'
Roadway
Without Sound Wall
With Sound Wall
Number
( feet)
1
Avenue 58
59
52
6.0
76
Avenue 58
59
53
6.0
78
Avenue 58
65
57
1 6.0
80
Avenue 58
65
57
6.0
Notes:
i Although not shown on Site Plan, the City typically requires construction of a 6-foot high CMU wall
adjacent to secondary
roadways.
Exceedance of City's 65 dBA CNEL residential exterior noise standard shown in bold.
Reference: FHWA RD-77-108 Model.
Source: Vista Environmental, Noise ImpoctAnalysis; October 19, 2021.
Table 4.13-10 shows that the noise levels at all proposed homes backyards near Avenue 58 would be
within the City's 65 dBA CNEL residential exterior noise standard forthe without and with the proposed
sound wall conditions. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the
generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Vibration is a unique form
of noise as the energy is transmitted through buildings, structures and the ground whereas audible
noise energy is transmitted through the air. Thus, vibration is generally felt rather than heard. The
ground motion caused by vibration is measured as peak particle velocity (PPV) in inches per second
and is referenced as vibration decibels (VdB) for the purpose of evaluating the potential for adverse
construction -related impacts. The vibration velocity level threshold of perception for humans is a PPV
of approximately 0.01 inches/second which equates to 65 VdB. A vibration velocity of 75 VdB is the
approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-13 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The construction activities for the proposed project are anticipated to include site preparation and
grading of the 9.7-acre project site, building construction of the 80 single-family homes, paving of the
onsite roads and road improvements to Avenue 58 and application of the architectural coatings.
Vibration impacts from construction activities associated with the proposed project would typically be
created from the operation of heavy off -road equipment. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project
site is a home at 58300 Almonte Drive that is located as near as 12 feet west of the project site.
Section 9.100.220(F) of the City's Municipal Code restricts the creation of vibration that is perceptible
without instruments at the boundary of a lot on which it is created. However, Section 9.100.220(F)
provides an exemption for temporary construction activities from this standard. Since neither the
Municipal nor the General Plan provide a quantifiable vibration threshold for temporary construction
activities, guidance from the Transportation and Construction -Induced Vibration Guidance Manual,
prepared by Caltrans, April 2020, has been utilized, which defines the threshold of perception from
transient sources such as off -road construction equipment at 0.25 inch per second peak particle
velocity (PPV).
CONSTRUCTION -RELATED VIBRATION IMPACTS
The primary source of vibration during construction would be from the operation of a bulldozer. A
large bulldozer would create a vibration level of 0.089 inch per second PPV at 25 feet. Based on typical
propagation rates, the vibration level at the nearest offsite home (12 feet to the west) would be 0.20
inch per second PPV. The vibration level at the nearest offsite home would be below the 0.25 inch per
second PPV threshold detailed above. Impacts would be less than significant.
The proposed project would consist of the development of 80 single-family homes. The on -going
operation of the proposed project would not include the operation of any known vibration sources
other than typical onsite vehicle operations for a residential development. Therefore, a less than
significant vibration impact is anticipated from the operation of the proposed project.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact: The proposed project would not expose people residing in the project area to excessive
noise levels from aircraft. The nearest airport is Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport that is located as
near as 3.6 miles east of the project site. The project site is located outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise
contours of this airport. Therefore, the proposed homes would not be exposed to excessive aircraft
noise and there would be no impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.13-14 Noise
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.14 Population and Housing
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:
&
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
A
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
—domm,L---
a. Induce substantial unplanned 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?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
Implementation of the General Plan would increase the estimated housing in the City by 41 dwelling
units and increase the estimated population by 102 persons. The population increase generated from
the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would represent an increase of approximately
0.0027% over the population estimated in the City in the existing General Plan. The increased
population growth would be negligible and would not generate substantial new employment growth
or require the expansion of public services or construction of new public service facilities. Additionally,
the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not cause construction of new infrastructure
that would facilitate unplanned growth. Potential impacts would be less than significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Induce substantial unplanned 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)?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not induce substantial
unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure). The proposed project would construct 80 single-family units. Based
on the City of La Quinta average household size of 2.62 persons per household, the project is estimated
to have 209 residents. Under the current zoning, a total of 39 units could be developed with an
estimated resident population of 102 people. The proposed project would develop an additional 41
units on the project site and increase the population on the project site by an additional 107 persons
over the estimated population based on the existing General Plan.
The City of La Quinta Housing Element identifies the population in the City in 2018 was 40,704 persons.
The additional population generated by the project would be an approximate 0.0026 increase over
estimated population in the existing General Plan, which would be considered a negligible increase.
Public Review Draft I June 2023
4.14-1 Population and Housing
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Southern California Association of Governments Connect SoCal, 2020 — 2045 RTP/SCS forecasts that
the population of La Quinta will grow to 47,700 in 2045, an increase of approximately 0.15% over the
2018 population. The additional population increase generated from the proposed project would
account for 0.017% of the estimated population growth. The estimated population increase would be
in the range of estimated future growth projections and would not be considered a substantial
unplanned housing growth.
The proposed project would create a residential product type that would meet housing needs for a
wide range of households and would be consistent with several General Plan goals and policies. These
would include:
• GOAL LU-5: A broad range of housing types and choices for all residents of the City.
• Policy LU-5.2: Consider changes in market demand in residential product type to meet the
needs of current and future residents.
• GOAL H-1: Provide housing opportunities that meet the diverse needs of the City's existing and
projected population.
• Policy H-6.1: Promote higher density and compact developments that increase energy
efficiency and reduce land consumption.
The project would not construct any new roads or major infrastructure in locations that are not
planned for growth, and therefore would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the
area, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact: Implementation of the project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The existing project site
is vacant. Therefore, it would not displace any existing housing or require replacement housing.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.14-2 Population and Housing
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.15 Public Services
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Mpa
Would the project:
ilk
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
1) Fire protection?
❑
❑
®
❑
2) Police protection?
❑
❑
®
❑
3) Schools?
❑
❑
®
❑
4) Parks?
❑
❑
®
❑
5) Other public facilities?
❑
❑
®
❑
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
Implementation of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase the population on
the project site above the population level estimated for the project by the existing General Plan which
would increase the demand for public services above the level estimated in the existing General Plan.
As part of the evaluation of the project, public service providers were coordinated with in regard to
the increased demand for public services that would be generated by the project. Public service
providers indicated that the increased demand for public services would have a less than significant
impact. Potential impacts to public services associated with the proposed General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change would be less than significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
1) Fire protection?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.15-1 Public Services
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection
services. The Riverside County Fire Department would provide fire protection service for the
project. As part of the evaluation for the project, Deputy Fire Marshal Adria Reinertson from
the Riverside County Fire Department was consulted on current facility and staffing levels and
potential impacts to fire protection services that could be associated with the project. The La
Quinta Fire Department serves as the City's liaison with Riverside County in the areas of fire
protection and medical response. The Department provides staffing from three paramedic and
engine companies. The closest fire station would be Fire Station 70, located at 54001 Madison
Street, approximately 1.4 miles from the project site. The Fire Station 70 includes 1 engine with
3 personnel.
Fire Station 70 would have a response time of 8 minutes. According to the Fire Department,
the project would increase the response time. The project site is currently planned for low
density residential land uses. The proposed project would increase the density on the project
site and increase the planned population on the site by 107 persons. Implementation of the
project would incrementally increase the demand for fire services. However, according to
Deputy Fire Marshal Adria Reinertson, current staffing levels and facilities are adequate to
serve the project and she identified that the project would not result in the need for new or
expanded facilities such as construction of a new fire station. The project would be responsible
for the payment of development impact fees to offset future fire protection needs.
Additionally, the project would be required to comply with applicable Riverside County Fire
Department codes, ordinances, and regulations regarding fire prevention and suppression
measures, fire hydrants and sprinkler systems, emergency access, and other similar
requirements. Compliance with these codes and standards would reduce potential impacts to
fire protection impacts to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2) Police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for law
enforcement protection services. The Riverside Sheriff's Department would provide police
protection service for the project. As part of the evaluation for the project, Sergeant Chris
Olsen from the Riverside County Sheriff's Department was consulted with on current facility
and staffing levels and potential impacts to police protection services that could be associated
with the project. The Sheriff's Department provides 24-7 police protection for the City and the
surrounding sphere of influence. The closest police station is 5.8 miles from the project site,
located at 86-625 Airport Boulevard, Thermal, CA.
The project site is currently planned for low density residential land uses. The proposed project
would increase the density on the project site and increase the planned population on the site
by 107 persons. Implementation of the project would incrementally increase the demand for
Sheriff services. The Sheriff's Department has indicated their current facilities and staffing are
adequate. The project would be responsible for development impact fees and would generate
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.15-2 Public Services
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
taxes to fund existing and future Sheriff Department facilities. Additionally, the project would
be required to comply with the Sheriff's Department Code requirements. With payment of
development impact fees and compliance with the Sheriff's Department Code requirements,
potential impacts to the Sheriff's Department services would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
3) Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for school services.
The project site is within the Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD). Schools that
would serve the proposed project are shown in Table 4.15-1, CVUSD School Locations and
Generation Factors for Multiple -Family Attached Units. Table 4.15-1 also shows the District
Generation Rate and projected students generated by the project. The proposed project would
incrementally increase the enrollment of students and the use of CVUSD facilities. The
proposed project would be required to pay development fees prior to issuance of a building
permit to offset the cost of providing school services and facilities. With payment of
development impact fees, there would be a less than significant impact to local school district
facilities.
Table 4.15-1
CVUSD School Locations and Generation Factors for Multiple -Family Attached Units
School Level
Name School
Location
Student Generation/
Number Students
Elementary
Westside Elementary School
82225 Airport BoulevardT
0.4357/35.7
Thermal, CA
Intermediate
Toro Canyon
86150 Avenue 66
0.1107/9.0
Thermal, CA
High School
Coachella Valley High School
83800 Airport Boulevard
0.2019/16.5
Thermal, CA
Total
61.2 Students
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
4) Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks. The City
of La Quinta currently operates 11 city parks, the Civic Center Campus, and three nature
preserve areas. All city parks, with the exception of the Civic Center Campus, provide a
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.15-3 Public Services
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
children's playground facility. La Quinta's three nature preserves are also available for public
recreation, as they all contain trails for hiking and bicycling. There are also several public pocket
parks located within existing subdivisions. The City of La Quinta works in conjunction with the
Desert Sands Unified School District to share the use of recreational facilities on school
properties.
La Quinta is also home to one public and 22 privately owned and operated golf courses, seven
of which are open and available for public use. The City's SilverRock Golf Course consists of 18
holes over 525 acres of land. Both public and private golf courses are included within the land
use calculation for Recreational Open Space. La Quinta's designated recreational open space
totals approximately 5,259 acres.
The Quimby Act allows local governments to exact from developers of residential subdivisions,
through the dedication of parkland or in -lieu fees, or both. The Quimby Act sets a minimum
threshold of 3.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The City of La Quinta has a policy of
providing a minimum of 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents. The City of La Quinta requires either
the payment of a park development fee, the dedication of land, or both when a residential
subdivision is proposed to meet the Quimby Act requirements.
The proposed 80-unit residential project would provide housing for approximately 209
persons, which would be a 107 persons population increase over the population estimated for
the site under the current General Plan and Zoning designations. The project site would be
within the vicinity of the Lake Cahuilla Regional Park and several local parks and recreation
facilities. Additionally, project residents would be provided with onsite recreation facilities and
open space, which reduces the demand and use of public parkland.
The proposed project would not contribute to a substantial increase in the overall population,
necessitating either construction or expansion of a park facility. The existing parkland within
the City of La Quinta should meet the recreational needs of the residents of the proposed
project. The project would also be subject to Quimby Act parkland fees to fund existing
facilities and/or provide future park facilities. With compliance with the City of La Quinta's
Quimby Act requirements, potential parkland impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
5) Other public facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for other public
facilities. The proposed project would not contribute to a substantial increase in the overall
population, necessitating either construction or expansion of a hospital, community -based
clinic, or other health services facility or program. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.15-4 Public Services
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.16 Recreation
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
El
❑
®
❑
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
b. Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
❑
❑
®
❑
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
Implementation of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase the population on
the project site above the level currently estimated in the General Plan and would increase the demand
for recreation facilities anticipated in the existing General Plan. Potential recreation impacts have been
evaluated as part of the evaluation of the proposed project and with onsite recreation amenities
proposed by the project and payment of park fees, the increased demand for recreation facilities were
determined to be less than significant. Potential impacts to recreation facilities associated with the
General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would be less than significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) 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?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the project would not 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. The proposed project includes onsite
recreation amenities for residents. The amenities would be in close proximity to residential uses which
would make them easily accessible and would discourage residents from seeking recreation facilities
located outside of the community. These onsite recreation facilities would reduce the proposed
project's demand for existing recreation facilities in the area and would not accelerate substantial
deterioration of existing recreation facilities. Potential impacts associated with increasing use of
existing and recreation facilities would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.16-1 Recreation
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment. The proposed project proposes the construction of outdoor recreation
facilities for future residents. Potential impacts associated with the construction of the proposed
recreation facilities have been evaluated as part of the proposed project. With the incorporation of
City codes and regulations and project mitigation measures, potential impacts associated with the
project, including the proposed recreation facilities, would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.16-2 Recreation
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.17 Transportation
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
d the project:
L
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
❑
❑
®
❑
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b. 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?
❑
❑
®
❑
The following analysis is based on a Traffic ImpactAnalysis Report and Vehicle Miles Travel Assessment
prepared by Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) in August 2022. Both reports are presented
in Appendix H.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase the population and
associated traffic generated from the project site above the level projected for in the existing General
Plan. The traffic analysis prepared for the project identified that increased traffic trips generated by
the proposed project would result in less than significant traffic impacts and would result in less than
significant vehicle miles traveled impacts. Potential traffic impacts associated with the General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change would be less than significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not conflict with a program plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities.
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ANALYSIS
The following analysis is based on a traffic analysis prepared for the project by LLG Engineers in August
2022. Included in this Traffic Impact Analysis are:
• Existing traffic counts.
• Estimated project traffic generation/distribution/assignment.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-1 Transportation
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
• Estimated cumulative projects traffic generation/distribution/assignment.
• AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for existing conditions.
• AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for existing with ambient growth to the Year 2025
with project traffic conditions.
AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for existing with ambient growth to the Year 2025
with project with cumulative projects traffic conditions (i.e., cumulative traffic conditions).
AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for Year 2045 with and without project traffic
conditions.
• Area -Wide Traffic Improvements. Site Access and Internal Circulation Evaluation.
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODS
The following methods were utilized to assess existing traffic conditions and project traffic impacts:
Level of Service (LOS) Analysis Methodologies
In conformance with County of Riverside requirements, existing AM and PM peak hour operating
conditions for the unsignalized intersections and unsignalized driveways were evaluated using the
Highway Capacity Manual 6 (HCM 6) methodology. Per the La Quinta Traffic Impact Analysis
Guidelines, the existing peak hour factor has been utilized for the Existing and Existing With Ambient
Growth With Project analysis scenarios. A peak hour factor of 0.95 was utilized for the Existing With
Ambient Growth With Cumulative Projects analysis scenario, and a peak hour factor of 1.00 was
utilized for Year 2045 Without Project and Year 2045 With Project analysis scenarios.
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Method of Analysis (Unsignalized Intersections)
The HCM unsignalized methodology for stop -controlled intersections was utilized for the analysis of
the unsignalized intersections. LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections differ from LOS criteria for
signalized intersections as signalized intersections are designed for heavier traffic and therefore a
greater delay. Unsignalized intersections are also associated with more uncertainty for users, as
delays are less predictable, which can reduce users' delay tolerance. Two-way stop -controlled
intersections are comprised of a major street, which is uncontrolled, and a minor street, which is
controlled by stop signs. Level of service for a two-way stop -controlled intersection is determined by
the computed or measured control delay. The control delay by movement, by approach, and for the
intersection as a whole is estimated by the computed capacity for each movement. LOS is determined
for each minor -street movement (or shared movement) as well as major -street left turns. The worst
side street approach delay is reported. LOS is not defined for the intersection as a whole or for major -
street approaches, as it is assumed that major -street through vehicles experience zero delay. The
HCM control delay value range for two-way stop -controlled intersections is shown in Table 4.17-1,
Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-2 Transportation
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.17-1
Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections (HCM Methodology)
LOS1n
HCM Ir
Delay Per Vehicle
(Seconds/Vehicle)
Level of Service Description
A
<_10.0
Little or no delay
B
>10.0 and <_15.0
Short traffic delays
C
>15.0 and <_ 25.0
Average traffic delays
D
>25.0 and <_ 35.0
Long traffic delays
E
>35.0 and <_50.0
Very long traffic delays
F
>50.0
Severe congestion
Source: LLG, Traffic Impact Analysis Report; August 17, 2022.
All -way stop -controlled intersections require every vehicle to stop at the intersection before
proceeding. Because each driver must stop, the decision to proceed into the intersection is a function
of traffic conditions on the other approaches. The time between subsequent vehicle departures
depends on the degree of conflict that results between the vehicles and vehicles on the other
approaches. This methodology determines the control delay for each lane on the approach, computes
a weighted average for the whole approach, and computes a weighted average for the intersection
as a whole. Level of service (LOS) at the approach and intersection levels is based solely on control
delay. The HCM control delay value range for all -way stop -controlled intersections is shown in Table
4.17-1, Level of Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections.
EXISTING TRAFFIC SETTING
Local access to the project site would be provided by Madison Street, Monroe Street, and Avenue 58.
The following discussion provides a brief synopsis of these key streets. The descriptions are based on
an inventory of existing roadway conditions.
Madison Street is a four -lane, divided roadway, oriented in the north -south direction. On -street
parking is not permitted on either side of the roadway within the vicinity of the project. The posted
speed limit on Madison Street is 50 miles per hour (mph). The key study intersection at Avenue 58 is
stop -controlled.
Monroe Street is a three -lane, divided roadway north of Avenue 58 and a two-lane, undivided
roadway south of Avenue 58. Monroe Street is oriented in a north -south direction. On -street parking
is not permitted on either side of the roadway within the vicinity of the project. The posted speed
limit on Monroe Street is 50 mph. The key study intersection at Avenue 58 is stop -controlled.
Avenue 58 is a four -lane, divided roadway west of Almonte Drive and a three -lane divided roadway
east of Almonte Drive. Avenue 58 is oriented in an east -west direction, located north of the project
site. On -street parking is not permitted on either side of the roadway within the vicinity of the project.
The posted speed limit on Avenue 58 is 50 mph. The key study intersection at Via Pasatiempo is stop -
controlled.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-3 Transportation
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The three (3) key study intersections within the project area are:
• Madison Street at Avenue 58
• Via Pasatiempo at Avenue 58
• Monroe Street at Avenue 58
The key study area intersections have been identified as the locations at which to evaluate existing
and future traffic operating conditions. Some portion of potential project -related traffic will pass
through these intersections and their analysis will reveal the expected relative impacts of the project.
These key study intersections were selected for evaluation based on discussions with City of La Quinta
staff. In compliance with the City of La Quinta guidelines, existing AM and PM peak hour traffic
volumes for the three study intersections evaluated have been increased by 20% to compensate for
variations in seasonal population. Figure 4.17-1, Existing Rodway Conditions and Intersection Controls,
illustrates an inventory of existing roadway conditions for the key study intersections. The number of
travel lanes and intersection controls for the project area intersections are identified.
All three key study intersections currently operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM and
PM peak hours. All critical movements for the all -way stop -controlled intersection also operate
acceptable levels of service per City requirements.
FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
To assess future traffic conditions, project traffic was combined with existing traffic and areawide
growth. Consistent with prior traffic studies conducted in La Quinta, the future growth in traffic
volumes has been calculated at two percent (2%) per year. Applied to existing Year 2022, traffic
volumes result in a six percent (6%) increase growth in existing volumes to horizon Year 2025.
Long-term (Year 2045) traffic volume forecasts for this traffic analysis were determined through
utilization of the RIVCOM model developed by WRCOG. The future Year 2045 traffic volumes were
post -processed based on the relationship of Year 2018 base year validation model run output to the
base year ground traffic counts. The projected volume was reviewed carefully, and adjustments were
applied as warranted based on local conditions and professional judgment.
Project Traffic Generation
The project traffic generation is forecasted by applying the appropriate vehicle trip generation
equations and/or rates to proposed project land uses. Traffic generation is expressed in vehicle trip
ends, defined as one-way vehicular movements, either entering or exiting the generating land use.
Generation equations and/or rates used in the traffic forecasting procedure are found in the 11th
Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE.) [Washington
D.C., 2021].
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-4 Transportation
Source: Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers; August 17, 2022.
N�
\� ALL/WAY
STOP
MADISON ST
58TH AVE
5
i -4-
ALL WAY
STOP
MONROE ST
58TH AVE
_� i
ONE 2WAY
STOP
VIA PASATIEMPO
58TH AVE
KEY
# =
STUDY INTERSECTION
=
APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT
=
STOP SIGN
P =
PARKING, NP = NO PARKING
U =
UNDIVIDED, D = DIVIDED
2 =
NUMBER OF TRAVEL LANES
(XX)=
POSTED SPEED LIMIT (MPH)
C 7 =
PROJECT SITE
LAVILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Existing Roadway Conditions and Intersection Controls
VCS Environmental
Figure 4.17-1
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Implementation of the proposed project would generate additional vehicle trips within the project.
Trip generation is expressed in vehicle trip ends, defined as one-way vehicular movements, either
entering or exiting the generating land use. Generation rates used in the traffic forecasting procedure
are found in the 11th Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) [Washington D.C., 2021]. A summary of the trip generation rates used in forecasting
the vehicular trips generated by the proposed project is shown in Table 4.17-2, Project Traffic
Generation. The table presents the forecasted daily and peak hour project traffic volumes for a
"typical" weekday. The trip generation potential for the proposed project was forecast using ITE Land
Use Code 210: Multiple Family Housing Low Rise Dwellings Housing trip rates. As shown in Table 4.17-
2, the proposed project would be expected to generate 754 daily trips (one half arriving and one-half
departing), with 56 AM Peak Hour Traffic Trips (15 inbound, 41 outbound) and 75 PM Peak Hour
Traffic Trips (47 inbound, 28 outbound) generated on a "typical" weekday.
Table 4.17-2
Project Traffic Generation
Daily
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Land Use
In
0
Total
Out
Total
2-way
Ges: Generation Rat
9.43
26%
74%
0.70
63%
37%
0.94
210: Multiple family Housing Low -Rise
Generation Trips:
754
15
41
56
47
28
75
Multiple -Family Dwellings
Project Trip Generation
754
1 15
1 41
56
47
F 28
75
Project Traffic Distribution
The second step of the forecasting process is traffic distribution, which identifies the origins and
destinations of inbound and outbound project traffic. These origins and destinations are typically
based on demographics and existing/expected future travel patterns in the study area. The third step
is traffic assignment, which involves the allocation of project traffic to study area streets and
intersections. Traffic assignment is typically based on minimization of travel time, which may or may
not involve the shortest route, depending on prevailing operating conditions and travel speeds. Traffic
distribution patterns are indicated by general percentage orientation, while traffic assignment
allocates specific volume forecasts to individual roadway segments and intersection turning
movements throughout the study area.
The traffic distribution pattern for the proposed project and project traffic volumes are shown in
Figure 4.17-2, Project Trip Distribution Pattern. Project traffic both entering and exiting the project
site have been distributed and assigned to the adjacent street system based on the following
considerations:
• Expected localized traffic flow patterns based on adjacent street channelization and presence
of traffic signals.
• Existing intersection traffic volumes.
• Ingress/egress availability at the project site.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-6 Transportation
V
Source: Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers; August 17, 2022.
N�
I0I �-40%
b ~5%
5%-0
MADISON ST
58TH AVE
D
/ L \
�5% \
45%J
5%— b�
MONROE ST
58TH AVE
—55% \
55%—
VIA PASATIEMPO @
58TH AVE
45%--�
PROJECT DRIVEWAY
58TH
AVE
KEY
®
= STUDY INTERSECTION
C
= PROJECT SITE
= INBOUND PERCENTAGE
= OUTBOUND PERCENTAGE
LAVILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Project Trip Distribution Pattern
VCS Environmental
Figure 4.17-2
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The anticipated AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes associated with the proposed project are
shown in Figure 4.17-3, AM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volumes, and Figure 4.17-4, PM Peak Hour
Proiect Traffic Volumes. The traffic volume assignments shown in Figures 4.17-3 and 4.17-4 reflect
the traffic distribution characteristics shown previously in Figure 4.17-2, Project Trip Distribution
Pattern, and the traffic generation forecast shown previously in Table 4.17-2, Project Traffic
rpnprntinn
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
The relative impact of the proposed project during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour was
evaluated based on analysis of future operating conditions at the key study intersections, without,
then with, the proposed project. The previously discussed capacity analysis procedures were utilized
to investigate the future volume -to -capacity relationships and service level characteristics at each
study intersection. The significance of the potential impacts of the project at each key intersection
was then evaluated using the following traffic impact criteria.
The City of La Quinta has established LOS "D" as the minimum level of service for its intersections.
Unsignalized intersections shall have a LOS "D" or better for all critical movements at an all -way stop -
controlled intersection and a LOS "E" for a side street on a two-way stop -controlled intersection. A
potentially significant impact at an unsignalized study intersection is defined to occur when, with
project traffic included, an intersection has a projected LOS "F" on a side street for two-way stop
controlled intersections or LOS "E" or worse for the intersection at an all -way stop -controlled
intersection and the addition of project traffic results in an addition of 3 seconds or more of delay for
any movement.
EXISTING WITH AMBIENT GROWTH WITH PROJECTTRAFFIC CONDITIONS
All three key study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM
and PM peak hours; refer to Table 4.17-3, Existing Traffic with Ambient Growth with Project Traffic.
All critical movements for the all -way stop -controlled intersections are also expected to operate at
acceptable levels of service per City requirements. Therefore, no deficiencies and no traffic
improvements are required.
Table 4.17-3
Existing Traffic with Ambient Growth with Project Traffic
Existing with
Ambient Growth
Existing Traffic
Minimum
Conditions
(Year 2025) with
Deficiency
Key Intersection
Time
Acceptable
project Traffic
period
LOS
Conditions
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOSIncrease
Yes/No
Madison Street
AM
LOS D
8.4
A
8.6
A
0.2
No
at Avenue 58
PM
9.4
A
9.7
A
0.3
No
Via Pasatiempo
AM
LOS D
8.7
A
8.7
A
0.0
No
at Avenue 58
PM
9.5
A
9.7
A
0.2
No
Monroe Street at
AM
LOS D
8.1
A
8.2
A
0.1
No
Avenue 58
PM
10.8
B
11.7
B
0.9
No
Source: LLG, Traffic Impact Analysis Report; August 17, 2022.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-8
Transportation
Source: Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers; August 17, 2022.
N�
/o o cD 1` 17\
� oJ'1fC)'I
MADISON ST
58TH AVE
D
/ 0\
/ moo f 1
o
�\ 2— moo/
MONROE ST
58TH AVE
o 0 1� 0
Jl-8
\ 23— /
VIA PASATIEMPO
58TH AVE
/ 0
8
7; rn N
PROJECT DRIVEWAY
58TH AVE
KEY
® = STUDY INTERSECTION
[ ] = PROJECT SITE
LAVILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
AM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volumes
VCS Environmental
Figure 4.17-3
Source: Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers; August 17, 2022.
N�
/000N 11\
� 2J'1fc)'I
MADISON ST
58TH AVE
D
/N
0\
/ NOO 2 \
o
MONROE ST
58TH AVE
CD CD 1— 0 \
J � — 27
\ 15—
VIA PASATIEMPO
58TH AVE
/ D \
27
\ 22;� �
\_ _�
PROJECT DRIVEWAY
58TH AVE
KEY
® = STUDY INTERSECTION
C 7 = PROJECT SITE
LAVILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volumes
VCS Environmental
Figure 4.17-4
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Year 2045 With Project Traffic Conditions
Table 4.17-4, Yeor2045 with Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity, summarizes the peak hour level
of service results at the three (3) key study intersections for "Year 2045 With Project" traffic
conditions. With project traffic conditions, all three (3) key study intersections are forecast to operate
at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. It should be noted that all critical
movements for the all -way stop -controlled intersections are forecast to also operate at acceptable
levels of service per City requirements.
Table 4.17-4
Year 2045 with Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity
Existing
Year 2045
Minimum
Traffic
Without
Year 2045
Deficiency
Key Intersection
Time
Acceptable
Period
LOS
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS
Increase
Yes/No
(s/v)
(s/v)
(s/v)
Madison Street
AM
8.4
A
9.6
A
9.7
A
0.1
No
LOS D
at Avenue 58
PM
9.4
A
10.6
B
10.7
B
0.1
No
Via Pasatiempo
AM
8.7
A
9.2
A
9.3
A
0.1
No
LOS D
at Avenue 58
PM
9.5
A
9.3
A
9.4
A
0.1
No
Monroe Street
AM
8.1
A
12.0
B
12.0
B
0.3
No
LOS D
at Avenue 58
PM
10.8
B
20.0
C
20.0
c
0.7
No
Source: LLG, Traffic Impact Analysis Report; August 17, 2022.
Recommended Improvements
As shown previously in Figure 4.17-1, Existing Roadway Conditions and Intersection Controls, roadway
improvements to be installed in conjunction with the project includes roadway widening and
restriping to provide and exclusive eastbound right -turn lane and an exclusive westbound left -turn
lane at the project driveway. Striping modifications are also proposed to provide an exclusive
eastbound right -turn lane at the emergency vehicle access driveway.
The results of the intersection and roadway segment analyses for Existing With Ambient Growth With
Project traffic conditions indicate that the three (3) key study intersections are forecast to continue
to operate at acceptable service levels. As there are no deficiencies, no traffic improvements are
required under this traffic scenario.
The results of the intersection and roadway segment analyses for Year 2045 With Project traffic
conditions indicate that the three (3) key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at
acceptable service levels. As there are no deficiencies, no traffic improvements are required under
this traffic scenario.
BIKEWAYS PLAN
The City of La Quinta Circulation Element Exhibit II-6 identifies that a Class 2 On -Street Bikeway is
designated on Avenue 58, including along the project frontage. The project incorporates a multi-
purpose trail along Avenue 58 and has been designed to ensure that the implementation of the
project would not cause any long-term conflicts that would affect the safety of a cyclist.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-11 Transportation
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
GOLF CART/NEV ROUTE SYSTEM
The City of La Quinta's planned circulation system includes Golf Cart/NEV pathways along existing and
future roadways connecting residential, recreational, commercial, and other community amenities.
The City of La Quinta Circulation Element Exhibit II-7 shows Class II On -Street Golf Cart/NEV Paths on
Avenue 58 including along the project frontage. The design of the project would provide 51 feet of
right of way and provide improvements to Avenue 58, per the City's General Plan criteria for Secondary
Arteria to accommodate the Golf Cart/NE Route System. Implementation of the project would not
cause any long-term conflicts that would affect the safety of Golf Cart/NEV users.
PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION
The project has been designed to provide pedestrian circulation within the project as well as
connections to offsite pedestrian circulation systems. The project's private loop road provides a 3.5-
foot landscaped parkway and a 4.5-foot sidewalk that would provide internal vehicle and pedestrian
access for the project. Pedestrian connection to Avenue 58 would be provided by sidewalks along the
driveway entrance to the project. Additionally, the City of La Quinta Circulation Element Exhibit II-7
identifies a multi -modal trail on Avenue 58 including along the project frontage. The intent of the
Circulation Element is that multi -use paths provide pedestrian, bicycle and NEV travel ways that are
separated from automobile traffic. As part of the City of La Quinta's Project Image Corridor
improvement requirements, the project would provide a 14,312 square feet landscape setback area
and multi -modal trail along the frontage of the project site consistent with the Circulation Element.
PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICE
The provider of public transit service within the City of La Quinta and the Coachella Valley is the
SunLine Transit Agency, which was created in 1977 and has since evolved to provide a wide range of
public transit services. The City of La Quinta Circulation Element does not identify mass transit routes
or facilities near the project site. Therefore, implementation of the project would not conflict with
any mass transit program.
CIRCULATION SYSTEM CONFLICT SUMMARY
As shown above, implementation of the proposed project would not result in conflicts with the
project area Traffic Circulation System, Bikeways Plan, Golf Cart/NEV Route System, Pedestrian
Circulation Plans or mass transit projects. Potential impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). On December 28, 2018, the California Natural
Resources Agency adopted revised CEQA Guidelines. Among the changes to the guidelines was the
removal of vehicle delay and LOS from consideration for transportation impacts under CEQA. With
the adopted guidelines, transportation impacts are to be evaluated based on a project's effect on
vehicle miles traveled using VMT per capita as the metric. The intent of this change is to balance the
needs of congestion management with statewide goals for infill development, promotion of public
health through active transportation, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Under the VMT
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-12 Transportation
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
methodology, screening is used to determine if a project will be required to conduct a detailed VMT
analysis.
The City of La Quinta has developed VMT Impact Screening Criteria to serve as a screening tool for
potential VMT impacts associated with select land use projects in the city. As such, the following
guidance summarizes the potential project screening and would not have a significant transportation
related CEQA impact, as shown in Step 1: Project Type Screening:
• Small Projects. This applies to projects with low trip generation per CEQA exemptions or
results in a 3,000 Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (MTCO2e) per year screening level
threshold, based on the County of Riverside Climate Action plan and South Coast Air Quality
Management District's draft interim guidance for assessing project -level greenhouse gas
impacts. Small projects include:
— Single -Family Housing projects less than or equal to 140 dwelling units.
— Multiple -Family (low-rise) Housing projects less than or equal to 200 DU.
— Multiple -Family (mid -rise) Housing projects less than or equal to 245 DU.
General Office Building with are less than or equal to 160,000 square feet.
Retail buildings with are less than or equal to 70,000 square feet.
— Warehouse (unrefrigerated) buildings with are less than or equal to 410,000 square
feet.
— General Light Industrial buildings with less than or equal to 170,000 square feet.
— Small Infill Projects.
— Transportation Projects that reduce or do not increase VMT.
— Project GHG emissions less than 3,000 Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide.
• Local Serving Projects. A project that induces local service land uses is determined to shorten
nondiscretionary trips by putting goods and services closer to residents, resulting in an overall
reduction in VMT. These land uses can be presumed to have a less than significant impact,
absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Local serving land uses are listed below:
— Local -serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet
— Local -serving K-12 schools
— Local parks
— Day care centers
— Local -serving gas stations
— Local -serving banks
— Local -serving hotels (e.g., non -destination hotels)
— Student housing projects
— Local serving community colleges that are consistent with the assumptions noted in
the RTP/SCS
— Affordable housing
The proposed project consists of 80 single-family swelling units, which is less than the "Small Projects"
threshold of 140 DU. Additionally, as identified in Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the project
would generate less than 3,000 Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide. Based on the criteria, the project
could be screened from a VMT analysis and would have a less than significant transportation related
CEQA impact, per the City of La Quinta Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Policy.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-13 Transportation
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the proposed
project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). The design of the project
would provide 51 feet of right of way and provide improvements to Avenue 58, per the City's General
Plan criteria for Secondary Arterial. As shown in Figure 4.17-5, Proposed Site Plan, access for the
proposed project would be provided from one (1) full -access stop controlled main gated driveway
and one (1) gated emergency vehicle access (EVA) driveway along Avenue 58, which are both located
an adequate distance from Monroe Street to provide safe and efficient access. Based on the existing
striping along Avenue 58, which includes a center striped median, the striping is recommended to be
modified to create a 60-foot westbound left turn pocket at the main project driveway while providing
a ±90-foot eastbound left turn pocket at Pasatiempo Court.
As shown in Figure 4.17-1, roadway improvements to be installed in conjunction with the project,
which includes roadway widening and restriping to provide an exclusive eastbound right -turn lane
and an exclusive westbound left -turn lane at the project driveway. Striping modifications are also
proposed to provide an exclusive eastbound right -turn lane at the emergency vehicle access
driveway. In addition, pedestrian and bicycle access will be provided via a pedestrian connection to
the existing sidewalk system along Avenue 58 at the main project driveway. The proposed roadway
improvement plans would be coordinated with the City to ensure required standards are met.
With the recommended striping improvements, the onsite circulation layout of the proposed project
would be adequate. The driveway widths have been confirmed and would be adequate for emergency
vehicles, service/delivery (FedEx, UPS, Amazon, etc.) trucks, trash trucks, and moving vans. In
addition, adequate storage and a turnaround area is provided for visitors at the call box. With
implementation of Mitigation Measure T-1, potential hazards associated with access to the project
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
T-1: The existing striping along Avenue 58, which includes a center striped median, is
recommended to be modified to create a 60-foot westbound left turn pocket at the main
project driveway while providing a ±90-foot eastbound left turn pocket at Pasatiempo
Court.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in
inadequate emergency access. The proposed project would involve the construction of new
structures and access ways. The project would be required to design, construct, and maintain
structures and access ways in compliance with local, regional, and state requirements related to
emergency access. The Riverside County Fire Department would review and ensure that adequate
emergency access and adequate emergency response times are maintained. Compliance with local,
regional, and state requirements related to emergency access and implementation of the project
would ensure that the proposed project would have adequate emergency access.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-14 Transportation
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Temporary activities associated with construction of project driveways and with the extension of
infrastructure into the project site could result in temporary partial lane closures along Avenue 58
which could hinder emergency access. The project would coordinate with the City of La Quinta on the
need for traffic controls during construction, which would determine if and what type of traffic
controls are needed to maintain emergency access. With compliance with the City of La Quinta's
traffic control requirements, potential impacts associated with conflicts to the emergency response
plans would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.17-15 Transportation
Source: Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers; August 17, 2022.
E
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Proposed Site Plan
VCS Environmental Figure 4.17-5
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:Lia
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. 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:
1) 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
2) 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.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Because this project is a CEQA action, it requires an offer of tribal consultation under Assembly Bill
[AB] 52 (Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1). In addition, it also requires a General Plan
Amendment and is therefore subject to the statutory requirements of Senate Bill 18 Tribal
Consultation Guidelines (Government Code Section 65352.3) that are initiated with this notification.
Regulatory Framework
AB 52 TRIBAL CONSULTATIONS
This project is subject to the requirements of Assembly Bill (AB) 52. AB 52 is applicable to projects that
have filed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or notice of a
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or Negative Declaration (ND) on or after July 1, 2015. The law
requires lead agencies to initiate consultation with California Native American Tribes that are
traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project and have requested such
consultation, prior to determining the type of CEQA documentation that is applicable to the project
(i.e., EIR, MND, ND). Significant impacts to "tribal cultural resources" are considered significant impacts
to the environment.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.18-1 Tribal Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
"Tribal cultural resources" are either of the following:
Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural
value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
A. Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of
Historical Resources.
B. Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k)
of Section 5020.1.
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
Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for
the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe.
To determine if such resources exist, under AB 52 (PRC §21080.3.1) lead agencies must consult with
tribes that request consultation and must make a reasonable and good faith effort to mitigate the
impacts of a development on such resources to a less than significant level. AB 52 allows tribes 30 days
after receiving notification to request consultation and the lead agency must then initiate consultation
within 30 days of the request by tribes.
SB 18 CONSULTATION
The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local
land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to,
cultural places. Prior to the adoption or any amendment of a general plan or specific plan, a local
government must notify the appropriate tribes (on the contact list maintained by the NAHC) of the
opportunity to conduct consultations for the purpose of preserving, or mitigating impacts to, cultural
places located on land within the local government's jurisdiction that is affected by the proposed plan
adoption or amendment. Tribes have 90 days from the date on which they receive notification to
request consultation unless a shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe.
SACRED LANDS RECORD SEARCH
An NAHC Sacred Lands File Search and Tribal contacts list was requested via email on July 21, 2021
(Appendix C). A negative Sacred Lands File Search was received from the NAHC on August 18, 2021.
The NAHC also provided a Tribal contacts list of local tribes that may wish to consult on the project.
They include the following (refer to Attachment C):
• Patricia Garcia -Plotkin, Director, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Jeff Grubbe, Chairperson, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Amanda Vance, Chairperson, Augustine Band of Mission Indians
• Doug Welmas, Chairperson, Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
Daniel Salgado, Chairperson, Cahuilla Band of Indians
Ray Chapparosa, Chairperson, Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians
Robert Martin, Chairperson, Morongo Band of Mission Indians
• Ann Brierty, THPO, Morongo Band of Mission Indians
• Jill McCormick, THPO, Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
Public Review Draft I June 2023
4.18-2 Tribal Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
• Joseph Hamilton, Chairperson, Ramona Band of Mission Indians
• Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair, Santa Rosa Band of Mission Indians
• Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
• Thomas Tortez, Chairperson, Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indian
The NAHC also submitted the SLF search results and Tribal contact list to Carlos Flores, Planner at the
City of La Quinta. The City will use its AB 52 contact list to conduct its consultation with interested
tribes independently of this study.
A listing of 13 tribal individuals representing 11 tribes were consulted as part of AB 52/SB 18
consultation. One tribe provided responses to the consultation request via email; refer to Appendix J.
The tribe that requested to consult was the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians which requested
the following:
• Formal government to government consultation under California Assembly Bill No. 52 (AB 52).
• A cultural resources inventory of the project area by a qualified archaeologist prior to any
development activities in this area.
• A copy of the records search with associated survey reports and site records from the
information center.
• Copies of any cultural resource documentation (report and site records) generated in
connection with this project.
• The presence of an approved Cultural Resource Monitor(s) during any ground disturbing
activities (including archaeological testing and surveys). Should buried cultural deposits be
encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the Monitor
shall notify a Qualified Archaeologist (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines) to
investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation plan for submission to the State Historic
Preservation Officer.
• Mitigation Measures for the project.
MITIGATION MEASURES
In response to the information received through AB 52/SB 18 consultation along with a record search
conducted for the project, the proposed project includes Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 that
would require archaeological and Native American monitoring to ensure proper protocol is followed if
resources are unearthed during ground disturbing activities.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not increase impacts to tribal
resources above the level of impacts identified in the existing General Plan. Potential impacts to tribal
resources have been evaluated as part of the evaluation of the proposed project and mitigation
measures have been recommended to minimize impacts to tribal resources. With compliance with
mitigation measures, potential impacts to tribal resources associated with the proposed General Plan
Amendment and Zone Change would be less than significant.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.18-3 Tribal Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
RESIDENTIAL 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:
1) 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)?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the
proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change to a 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). The proposed project is not listed nor
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). Because historical
resources have been known to occur within the region, there is the potential that historical
resources could be encountered during excavation activities. To avoid adverse impacts to
historical resources, if cultural resources are discovered during grading, work must be halted
in the vicinity of the find and a qualified archaeologist be retained to identify and evaluate the
cultural material. With implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1, potential impacts to
unknown historical resources would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure CR-1 is required.
2) 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.
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the
proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change to 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. As previously indicated, a record search and pedestrian survey conducted on the project
site did not identify any known archaeological resources on the project site. Three prehistoric
isolates are recorded within one-half mile. Although the project site is not located within a
general area of sensitivity for prehistorical archaeology, the grading activities associated with
construction of the proposed project could encounter native soils and could have the potential
to encounter unknown archaeological resources. To avoid adverse impacts to archaeological
resources that could be encountered during construction, it is recommended if cultural
resources are discovered during grading, work must be halted in the vicinity of the find and a
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.18-4 Tribal Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
qualified archaeologist be retained to identify and evaluate the cultural material. With
implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2, potential impacts to unknown
archaeological resources would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.18-5 Tribal Cultural Resources
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of
new or expanded water, or 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?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
Implementation of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase the
population on the project site above the population level estimated in the existing General Plan. The
increased population would increase the demand for utility services above the estimates anticipated
in the existing General Plan. The existing General Plan identifies low density residential land uses for
the project site. Compared to the existing General Plan the proposed project would have less overall
water demand. Additionally, a substantial amount of wastewater treatment capacity would be
available for the project. Potential impacts to utility systems associated with the proposed General
Plan Amendment and Zone Change would be less than significant.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, or
wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.19-1 Utilities and Service Systems
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water, or wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric
power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects. Implementation of the proposed project would require adding
onsite utilities since the project site is currently undeveloped. As part of the construction activities for
the proposed project, new onsite utility service systems would be constructed, and they would connect
to existing utility systems currently provided in the project area. Construction connections to offsite
utility systems would involve some minor trenching. Potential impacts would be short-term and
construction BMPs would be in place to minimize construction related impacts. Each utility service
provider would coordinate on the design/installation and would ensure that utility service would
comply with construction standards and that adverse impacts to the environment are avoided.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple
dry years.
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) would provide water service to the project. All domestic
water provided by CVWD is extracted from the groundwater basin through a system of wells, which
CVWD operates throughout its District. In addition, CVWD imports water from the Colorado River,
which is used to recharge the groundwater basin. There are three recharge facilities in the Valley: one
located northwest of Palm Springs, one located southeast of La Quinta, in Martinez Canyon, and one
located in La Quinta, south of Avenue 58, and west of Madison Street. CVWD also owns and operates
the water distribution system, which is generally located under existing streets in the public right-of-
way. The CVWD also maintains water storage tanks throughout its service area, including ten existing
or planned tanks in the City and its Sphere of Influence, with capacities ranging from 250,000 to 10
million gallons.
Water Agencies, such as the CVWD, are required to prepare and update their Urban Water
Management Plans (UWMP) every five years. The UWMP identifies long-term resource planning to
ensure that adequate water supplies are available to meet existing and future water needs. The water
demands are based on the City of La Quinta's existing General Plan planned land uses within the CVWD
water service area. The UWMP includes a water supply and demand assessment that compares the
total water supply sources available to the water supplier with the long-term total projected water use
over the next 20 years, in five-year increments, for a normal water year, a single dry water year, and a
drought lasting multiple consecutive water years. The most recent UWMP for CVWD was prepared in
2020.
The UWMP identifies that within the water service area, the existing General Plan Low Density
designation of up to 4.0 single-family dwelling units per acre planned for the project site would have
adequate water supplies during a normal, single dry, and multiple dry years. The proposed project
proposes a General Plan Amendment to increase the density on the project site from Low Density 4.0
dwelling units per acre to Medium/High Density up to 16.0 dwelling units per acre and proposes to
increase the number of residential units that could be developed on the site from 39 units to 80 units.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.19-2 Utilities and Service Systems
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.19-1, Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan and Coachella Valley Water District Urban Water
Management Plan Water Demand, identifies the Coachella Valley Water District Urban and SGMA
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan water demand rates for Low Density Single -Family and
Medium/High Density Multiple -Family land uses.
Table 4.19-1
Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan and Coachella Valley Water District
Urban Water Management Plan Water Demand
Existing General Plan
Proposed
Water Demand Rate
39 Units Allowed
Project 80 Units
Land Use
IL
Gallons Per
Gallons Per
Gallons Per
Household Unit
Household Unit
Household Unit
Per Day
I
Per Day
I
Per Day
Low Density Single -Family
494
19,266
Medium/High Density Multiple -Family
1170
-4-
13,600
Source: 2022 Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan.
Table 4.19-1 shows that the water demands for the proposed 80 Medium/High Density multiple -family
dwellings would have a lower daily water demand compared to the 39 Low -Density single-family
dwellings that could be developed under the current General Plan. The overall water demand for the
project site would be less. The reduction in water demand would be a result of cluster residential
development common area landscaping, use of energy efficient water fixtures, minimal turf grass for
park/playground area, and use of decomposed granite for landscaping. The proposed multiple -family
cluster development would have approximately 29% less demand for water compared to the water
demands for single-family homes that could be developed under the existing General Plan Low Density
land use designation.
The proposed project would reduce overall water demands in the City and enhance the reliability of
future water supplies. The project would also attain General Plan Policy WR-1.4.c, which requires
onsite retention for new development projects to the greatest extent possible, to provide added
recharge of the aquifer. The project Drainage Plan proposes a bioretention basin to capture
stormwater runoff and infiltrate it into the ground water basin.
The final water plan design for the project would be required to comply with the CVWD Development
Design Manual which provides comprehensive procedural and technical requirements for the
planning, design, and construction of CVWD service infrastructure required for new development to
ensure water efficient facilities and water conservation measures are incorporated into the project,
which would further reduce water demands. Additionally, the proposed project would be required to
coordinate with CVWD and secure a Will Serve Letter which would indicate that CVWD would have the
ability to provide adequate water service to the proposed project. The design of the water distribution
system would be required to coordinate with CVWD to ensure that they are adequately sized to meet
the long-term operation needs for the project.
The proposed General Plan Amendment would reduce water demands on the project site compared
to the current General Plan land uses planned for the project site and would reduce overall water
demands in the City and create surplus water supplies through a net reduction. The project would also
contribute to recharging the groundwater basin by providing an onsite retention basin that would
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.19-3 Utilities and Service Systems
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
collect storm water and rainfall and infiltrate it into the groundwater. With water demand reductions
associated with the project and the project contribution to help maintain the groundwater basin, the
proposed project water demands would not conflict with UWMP and there would be adequate water
supplies for normal, single dry, and multiple dry years and long-term operational impacts associated
with providing water services to the project. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not 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. Sanitary
sewer collection and treatment facilities are provided by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
within most of the City of La Quinta. The Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4), located in
Thermal, serves the area in the City of La Quinta located south of Miles Avenue including the proposed
project site. WRP 4 is the District's second largest wastewater reclamation plant in terms of treatment
capacity and provides collection service to approximately 63,000 people in the cities of La Quinta,
Mecca, Palm Desert, and Thousand Palms. The WRP-4 has a current capacity of just under 10 mgd and
processes approximately 5 mgd per day. According to City's General Plan EIR, WRP-4 currently has
excess capacity. There are currently no plans for expansion at the Mid -Valley Plant.
The U.S. Environmental Policy Act (EPA) estimates that the typical average daily wastewater flows are
40 to 60 gallons per person per day (USEPA, 2002). Therefore, using the City's current household
number of 2.6 persons per household, the project could generate approximately 8,320 to 16,640
gallons of wastewater per day. Under the existing General Plan, 39 single-family residential units could
be developed with a wastewater demand of 4,056 to 8,080 gallons per day. Based on the current
treatment capacity of 10 mgd and current processes of approximately 5 mgd per day, the incremental
increase in wastewater treatment demand associated with the proposed project would be a nominal
increase and sufficient capacity would be available to serve the project. Additionally, project plans will
be reviewed by CVWD and City staff to ensure wastewater capacity and compliance. Sewer installation
and connection fees in place at the time of development or connection would be collected by CVWD.
Therefore, less than significant impacts relative to wastewater capacity are expected.
The proposed project would connect to an existing 18-inch diameter force main along Avenues 58.
Based on the available capacity at the Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant, the increase in wastewater
treatment generated by the proposed project would have a less than significant impact. Additionally,
as part of the final design, the proposed project would be required to coordinate with CVWD and
secure a Will Serve Letter which would ensure that the CVWD would have the ability to provide
adequate wastewater service to the proposed project. The design of the wastewater distribution
system would be required to coordinate with CVWD to ensure that they are adequately sized to meet
the long-term operation needs for the project. With coordination with CVWD, long-term operational
impacts associated with providing wastewater services to the project would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.19-4 Utilities and Service Systems
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
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?
Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed project would not 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. Solid waste disposal for the proposed project would be
Burrtec Waste and Recycling Services, LLC (Burrtec) under a franchise agreement with the City. Burrtec
collects solid waste and transports it to the Edom Hill Transfer Station, located west of the City in the
City of Cathedral City. From the Transfer Station, waste is taken to one of three regional landfills: Lamb
Canyon, Badlands or El Sobrante. According to City's General Plan EIR, all three landfills have capacity
remaining for the long-term.
The proposed project will generate 96 tons of solid waste per year. The analysis was based on the
default CaIEEMod waste generation rate. The amount generated is almost twice as much than would
be generated from the site under the existing low density residential land use designation. Solid waste
generated from the project would consist mostly of typical household trash from residents and visitors,
and workers.
The El Sobrante and Lamb Canyon Landfills are permitted to receive 5,000 tons of solid waste per day
and the Badlands Landfill is permitted to receive up to 4,000 tons of solid waste per day. The 96 tons
of solid waste per year equates to about 545 pounds per day which would represent 0.054% of the
daily amount of solid waste disposal permitted by the El Sobrante and Lamb Canyon Landfills and a
0.068% of the daily amount of solid waste disposal permitted at the Badlands Landfill. The project
would use one of the three landfill sites. Based on availability and remaining capacity of all landfills, it
is unlikely that the volume of solid waste generated from the proposed project would exceed landfill
capacity. The amount of solid waste generated from the construction of the project would not exceed
the capacity of local facilities or exceed state and local standards.
The project does not involve demolition of any structures. The site preparation phase for the project
would involve the removal of vegetation, tree stumps, and stones. It is estimated that approximately
100 trucks of site preparation debris would be disposed at one of the three surrounding landfills, which
equates to approximately 55 tons of solid waste. This amount would be disposed over several days
and would be well under the daily amount of solid waste disposal permitted at any of the three
landfills.
Potential impacts associated with providing solid waste disposal service to the proposed project would
be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than Significant Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would comply with federal,
state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The
proposed project would produce solid waste associated with the construction stages as well as during
operation. The proposed project would be required to comply with state and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste. Applicable regulations include California's Integrated Waste
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.19-5 Utilities and Service Systems
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) which requires cities and counties throughout the state to divert
50% of all solid waste from landfills through source reduction, recycling, and composting; 2008
modifications of AB 939 to reflect a per -capita requirement rather than tonnage; AB 341 which
increased the statewide goal for waste diversion to 75% by 2020; and the California Solid Waste Reuse
and Recycling Access Act (AB 1327) which requires local agencies to adopt an ordinance to set aside
areas for collecting and loading recyclable materials in development projects.
In accordance with the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery disposal
requirements, Best Management Practices would be employed to reduce solid waste disposal such as
the recycling of all plastic bags, containers, and green waste composting, chipping, and shredding.
Additionally, Best Management Practices would be implemented to reduce the solid waste generated
from construction activities and, where feasible, would recycle construction debris. With
implementation of the Best Management Practices and compliance with the California Department of
Resources Recycling and Recovery disposal requirements, potential solid waste disposal impacts would
be less than significant. Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with the ability to
comply with these regulations.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.19-6 Utilities and Service Systems
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.20 Wildfire
Less Than
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the
Significant
Impact With
Significant
No
Impact
project:
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
El
El
❑
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
❑
❑
❑
11
landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Background
A wildland fire is a non-structural fire that occurs in vegetative fuels. Wildland fires can occur in
undeveloped areas and spread to urban areas where the landscape and structures are not designed
and maintained to be fire resistant. The potential for wildland fires represents a hazard where
development is adjacent to open space or within proximity to wildland fuels or designated Fire Hazard
Safety Zones. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection identifies the project site is
not within an area that has not been designated as a High Fire Hazard Area or State Responsibility
Area; refer to Figure 4.20-1, Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Additionally, the City of La Quinta General Plan
Safety Element identifies that the project site is located in an area that has less than moderate
potential for high fire zones.
General Plan Amendment/Zone Change
The project site is not within a High Fire Hazard Area or a State Responsibility Area. Implementation of
the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not increase the risk for wildfire
impacts.
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
No Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.20-1 "fildfire
Source: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE); September 2021.
-*- approximate Project Location
INC-11
LAVILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
VCS Environmental Figure 4.20-1
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
The Riverside County Sheriff's Department would oversee evacuating neighborhoods in the event of a
fire that threatens homes. These evacuations would be decided within the Incident Command
structure in consultation with the fire department, law enforcement, public works, and local
government liaisons. In the event of emergency, residents would be directed to specific evacuation
routes to avoid conflicts with emergency response plans. Therefore, the proposed project would not
significantly impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact: The proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing winds,
and other factors, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. Topography influences the movement of air and the
direction of a fire course. Additionally, wind events magnify the risks of wildfire and would have the
potential to expose inhabitants to elevated pollutant concentrations. According to the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the project site is not identified as a High Fire Hazard
Area or near a State Responsibility Area. Additionally, the project site is not contiguous to wildland
slope areas that could function as a conduit for wildland fire. Additionally, the proposed project
would have surrounding roadways and driveways which would also function as fire breaks. The City's
Fire Hazard Element informs that from 2013 to March 2021, no wildfires occurred within the City and
Sphere of Influence. Additionally, there is no unusual fire risk, fire spread risk or death and injury risk
according to the Fire -Community Assessment Response Evaluation System (Fire CARES). A "big data"
analytical system provides information on the capacity and capability of local fire departments
regarding the risk environment they are called to respond. Therefore, the proposed project would
not exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from
a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire in or near State Responsibility Areas or lands
classified as extremely high fire hazard severity zones.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact: The proposed project would not 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.
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the project site is not identified
as a High Fire Hazard Area or near a State Responsibility Area. The project includes the construction of
water infrastructure and other utility improvements that would aid in fire suppression. The proposed
project does not include any changes to existing roadways that would exacerbate fire risk. The
proposed project would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that
would exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. The California
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.20-3 Wildfire
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Fire Code Section B105 imposes fire -flow requirements for buildings based on their size and
construction type. CalFire updated the 2010 Strategic Fire Plan in 2018, to coordinate Unit Fire Plans
that address risks, fire protection needs, and strategies with other levels of fire plans and community
wildfire protection plans to provide one consistent approach. Therefore, the proposed project would
not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would not 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. Landslides, including mud flows and debris flows can be
triggered by erosion and downslope runoff caused by rain following a fire. According to the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the project site is not identified as a High Fire Hazard
Area or near a State Responsibility Area. The proposed project would not increase the risk for wildland
fire impacts that 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 in or near
State Responsibility Areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.20-4 Wildfire
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
Would the project:
Significant
Impact With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
a. Have the potential to 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 plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b. 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. Have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
❑
®
❑
❑
directly or indirectly?
d. Have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term
❑
❑
®
❑
environmental goals?
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
a) Have the potential to 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 plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: The General Plan Amendment, Zone
Change and the proposed residential project would not have the potential to 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 plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
Development of the project site would result in the direct removal of non-native trees, herbaceous
fortis, and common ruderal plant species. Based on the high levels of disturbance, low habitat quality
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-1 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
and the lack of detection of any special status plants during the biological and focus plant surveys, the
project is not expected to impact any special status plant species.
Development of the project site would result in the disruption and removal of non-native habitat. Due
to the disturbed nature of the site, surrounding development, and through compliance with the
Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (CVMSHCP), impacts resulting from the
project are anticipated to have a less than significant effect on wildlife species. Although no sensitive
wildlife species were observed within the project site during the field survey, five wildlife species have
at least moderate (or low to moderate) potential to occur including the Coachella Valley fringe -toed
lizard, prairie falcon, burrowing owl, pocketed free -tailed bat and Western yellow bat. To avoid
potential impacts to special status species, Mitigation Measures BIC-1 through BIC-4 are
recommended to reduce impacts to less than significant. The project would not reduce the general
wildlife populations below self-sustaining levels.
The property has been identified as not eligible for designation to or listing on the California Register
of Historical Resources (CRHR) and Local Register under all criteria and would not cause an adverse
significant effect to a historic resource. A cultural resources record search and pedestrian survey
conducted on the project site did not identify any known archaeological resources. Three prehistoric
isolates have been recorded within one-half mile. Although the project site is not located within a
general area of sensitivity for prehistorical archaeology, the grading activities associated with
construction of the proposed project could encounter native soils and could have the potential to
encounter unknown archaeological resources. To avoid adverse impacts to archaeological resources
that could be encountered during construction, Mitigation Measure CR-1 is recommended, which
requires archaeological monitoring and Native American monitoring to occur during project
excavations into alluvial soils, estimated to occur within near surface soils to a depth of 5 to 10 feet.
With implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1, potential impacts to unknown archaeological
resources would be less than significant and the project would not eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or prehistory.
b) 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)?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change and the proposed residential project would not have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. Section 15355 of the Guidelines defines cumulative
impacts as "... two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or
which compound or increase other environmental impacts." Cumulative impacts represent the change
caused by the incremental impact of a project when added to other proposed or committed projects
in the vicinity.
Section 15130 of the Guidelines states that an EIR may determine that a project's contribution to a
significant cumulative impact will be rendered less than cumulatively considerable and thus is not
significant. A project's contribution is less than cumulatively considerable if the project is required to
implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the
cumulative impact. The discussion of any cumulative impacts shall reflect the level and severity of the
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-2 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
impact and the likelihood of occurrence, but not in as great a level of detail as that necessary for the
project alone.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1) states that the information utilized in an analysis of cumulative
impacts should come from one of two sources:
• A list of past, present, and probable future projects, producing related cumulative impacts,
including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency.
• A summary of projections contained in an adopted General Plan or related planning document
designed to evaluate regional or area -wide conditions.
The cumulative analysis for the proposed project is based on a list of past, present, and probable future
projects, producing related cumulative impacts. In coordination with the City of La Quinta, ten
cumulative projects have been identified in the City of La Quinta and four cumulative projects in
Riverside County that have either been built, but not yet fully occupied, or are being processed for
approval. These 14 cumulative projects have been included as part of the cumulative background
setting. A summary of related projects in the vicinity of the project site used in the cumulative analysis
is presented in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, and Figure 4.21-1, Cumulative Project
Location Map.
Table 4.21-1
Related Cumulative Projects
No. 7
Cumulative Project
ressW Description
City of La Quinta
1.
Capistrano
Monroe Street at Camino San Juan
139 DU Single -Family Detached
2.
Piazza Serena
Pasatiempo Court at Avenue 58
51 DU Single -Family Detached
3.
Stone Creek
Stone Creek way at Avenue 58
66 DU Single -Family Detached
4.
Signature at PGA West
PGA Boulevard at Signature Way
100 DU Multi -Family Housing
5.
Cantera
Sidonia Way at Avenue 58
85 DU Single -Family Detached
6.
Andalusia Country Club
Marbella at Andalusia
63 DU Single -Family Detached
7.
Andalusia TTM
North of Seville
54 DU Single -Family Detached
8.
Malaga TTM 33597
SEC of Monroe Street at Avenue 60
57 DU Single -Family Detached
9.
Monroe Dates
Monroe Street at 61st Avenue
94 DU Single -Family Detached
10.
TTM No. 34642
SWC of Monroe Street at Avenue 54
90 DU Single -Family Detached
County of Riverside
11.
TR37192
SWC of Orchid Court at Avenue 60
198 DU Single -Family Detached
12.
TTM38136
NWC of Orchid Court at 61st Avenue
231 DU Single -Family Detached
13.
Vista Santa Rosa
Gateway Village
SWC of Monroe Street at Airport
Boulevard
7,550 SF Retail, 16 VFP Gas Station
with 5,800 SF Convenience Store,
15,800 SF Pharmacy, 2,400 SF Fast
Food Restaurant with Drive Through,
128 DU Assisted Living
14.
TR36902
East of Monroe Street, south of 55th
Avenue
80 DU Single -Family Detached
Abbreviations: DU = Dwelling Units; SF = Square -Feet; VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions
Source: LLG, Traffic Impact Analysis Report; August 17, 2022.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-3 Mandatory Findings of Significance
1. CAPISTRANO
2. PIAZZA SERENA
3. STONE CREEK
4. SIGNATURE AT PGA WEST
5. CANTERA
6. ANDALUSIA COUNTRY CLUB
7. ANDALUSIA TTM
8. MALAGA TTM 33597
9. MONROE DATES
10. TTM NO. 34642
11. TR37192
12. TTM38136
13. VISTA SANTA ROSA GATEWAY VILLAGE
14. TR36902
Ci
s=
P
KEY
® = CUMULATIVE PROJECTS LOCATION
[ = PROJECT SITE
a
o a
Awpnl.ic Stl AYPnuL- 50 Avtmup 50
v
Avr-
0
9 w`
rn h
L�
� N'
O'
Avenue 54
10
� 14
0
O4 Airport Blrri ., ortEp vd
13
O �
OO Vista
O❑ Santa Rosa
g
®AYet, de 00 Avenue 60.
11
O12
9
52nd Ave
Avcnuu 50 a
Coachella
01
m Jacqueline
S Cochran
Sandy Kmrner Regional
Airport Thermal
Avenue 60
Source: Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers; August 17, 2022.
LAVILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
e Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Cumulative Project Location Map
VCS Environmental Figure 4.21-1
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
AESTHETICS
Land uses developed under the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, including the
proposed residential project, have been evaluated for potential aesthetic impacts. The proposed
project would involve the construction of 80 single-family homes as part of a cluster Planned Unit
Development. Potential aesthetics impacts for the project site have been minimized or avoided
through compliance with the City of La Quinta General Plan polices and Zoning Code Planned Unit site
development requirements which would be confirmed through the City's development review
process. Therefore, the proposed project would not be contributing to cumulative aesthetic impacts.
Related development projects shown previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would
be evaluated on a project -by -project basis for potential aesthetic impacts and would be required to
comply with applicable site development and design standards to minimize potential aesthetic
impacts. Compliance with applicable site development and design standards would reduce the
potential for significant aesthetic impacts. Therefore, the proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone
Change and the proposed residential project would not contribute considerably to significant
cumulative impacts.
AIR QUALITY
Operational Impacts
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would
increase the population on the project site above what is currently projected for the project site, which
would increase long-term operational air emissions above what was evaluated in the in the City's
General Plan EIR. For operational air quality emissions, any project that does not exceed or can be
mitigated to less than the daily regional threshold values would not be considered by SCAQMD to be
a substantial source of air pollution and would not add significantly to a cumulative impact. Operation
of the project would not result in emissions in excess of the SCAQMD regional emissions thresholds.
Therefore, the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and operation of the proposed
residential project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant. The project's operational emissions would not exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds and
would be consistent with the 2016 AQMP. Therefore, the project would not be significantly
cumulatively considerable, and a less than significant impact would occur.
Construction Impacts
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would allow
an increased number of residential structures to be constructed on the project site, which would
increase the level of construction emissions that could be generated based on the existing General
Plan. The context for assessing cumulative air impacts from short-term construction activities includes
quantifying emissions and comparing the emissions to the applicable SCAQMD screening thresholds.
As discussed in Section 4.3, Air Quality, the proposed project's construction emissions would be below
SCAQMD thresholds. Further, the proposed project would be required to comply with SCAQMD
Fugitive Dust Rule 403, which would require dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from
creating a nuisance offsite. With compliance with Fugitive Dust Rule 403, short-term construction air
emissions would be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. Cumulative development projects
would be required to reduce their emissions per SCAQMD rules and mandates, cumulative
construction emissions would not contribute to an exceedance of air quality standards, and therefore
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-5 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
would comply with the goals of the 2016 AQMP. Thus, it can be reasonably inferred that the General
Plan Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project -related construction activities, in
combination with the cumulative development projects shown previously in Table 4.21-1, Related
Cumulative Projects, would not deteriorate the local air quality and would not result in cumulatively
considerable construction -related impacts. Construction source emissions for the project would not
exceed the applicable LSTs with implementation. Thus, the project's construction localized emissions
impacts would not be cumulatively considerable toward exposing sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations.
Air Quality Management Plan
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would be
subject to the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The proposed residential project's
construction and operational air emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds, and
localized NOx emissions during construction would be below SCAQMD LST thresholds. The proposed
residential project would also be required to comply with the applicable SCAQMD emission reduction
measures to further reduce fugitive dust emissions. As such, the General Plan Amendment, Zone
Change and the proposed residential project would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution
to impacts in this regard, and a less than significant impact would occur.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not increase impacts to biological
resources above the level of impacts identified in the existing General Plan and would not contribute
considerably to potential cumulative significant impacts to biological resources.
Development of the project site would result in the direct removal of non-native trees, herbaceous
forbs, and common ruderal plant species. Common plant species present within the project site occur
in large numbers throughout the region and their removal does not meet the significance threshold.
Based on the high levels of disturbance, low habitat quality and the lack of detection of any special
status plants during the biological and focus plant surveys, the project is not expected to impact any
special status plant species. Development of the project site would result in the disruption and removal
of non-native habitat. Due to the lack of native habitat and the level of existing disturbance from
agricultural activity onsite and within the vicinity (e.g., nearby date palm tree orchard), these impacts
would not be expected to reduce the general wildlife populations below self-sustaining levels.
Although no sensitive wildlife species were observed within the project site during the field survey,
five wildlife species have at least moderate (or low to moderate) potential to occur including the
Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard, prairie falcon, burrowing owl, pocketed free -tailed bat and Western
yellow bat. To avoid potential impacts to Special Status species, Mitigation Measures 310-1 through
BIO-4 are recommended to reduce impacts to less than significant. With implementation of Mitigation
Measures 1310-1 through B10-4, the proposed project would not contribute considerably to significant
cumulative impacts to sensitive plant or wildlife species.
The proposed project will not impact any native habitats or sensitive vegetation of any special status
habitats. No riparian habitats, sensitive vegetation communities or jurisdictional waters occur on the
project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to the cumulative loss of native
habitats, sensitive vegetation communities or jurisdictional waters.
The project site may serve as a function in the local wildlife dispersal and foraging. However, due to
the disturbed nature of the site and the degraded habitats, the loss of foraging habitat and/or effect
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-6 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
on local wildlife movement would be less than significant. Due to the potential for onsite bird nesting,
project construction could result in impacts to nesting birds that would be in violation of the Federal
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish and Game Code. Therefore, recommended
avoidance measures, including a pre -construction nesting bird survey to avoid impacts prior to the
start of work, would be implemented. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure 1310-3, potential
impacts to migratory birds would be less than significant and the proposed project would not
contribute considerably to significant cumulative impacts to migratory birds.
Cumulative development projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects,
would be required to comply with state and federal laws that provide for the protection of biological
resources and where needed, would implement measures to minimize impacts to biological resources.
Compliance with local, state, and federal laws would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.
Therefore, the proposed General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and proposed residential project,
considered with cumulative development projects in the vicinity of the project site, would not result
in significant cumulative impacts to biological resources.
CULTURAL/PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not increase impacts to cultural or
paleontological resources above the level of impacts identified in the existing General Plan and would
not contribute considerably to potential cumulative significant impacts to cultural or paleontological
resources. The context for assessing cumulative impacts to local archaeological and paleontological
resources is to determine whether the project would result in a loss of these resources that could
diminish or eliminate important information relevant to the history of the project area. The proposed
project would be required to comply with Mitigation Measures CR-1, CR-2, , PALEO-1, PALEO-2 and
PALEO-3, which would require an archaeologist/paleontologist to evaluate any discovered potential
archaeological/paleontological resources, and appropriate steps to preserve or curate the artifact and
halt or redirect work. This would eliminate any potential loss of important archaeological or
paleontological information that may be buried under the project site. With regard to potential
discovery of human remains during construction, the project would be required to comply with State
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as
to the origin and disposition pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code.
Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential project would
not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to impacts related to a cumulative loss of
important archaeological or paleontological resources, and/or disturbed human remains. Related
cumulative projects in the project area would be evaluated for potential impacts to cultural resources
and would be required to implement measures to reduce impacts to cultural resources. Therefore, the
General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential project, considered with the
related cumulative projects, would not result in significant cumulative impacts to cultural resources.
ENERGY
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase the population on the
project site above the level identified in the existing General Plan which would increase long-term
energy consumption above that currently estimated in the existing General Plan for electricity and
natural gas. The areas considered for cumulative impacts to electricity and natural gas supplies are the
service areas of the Imperial Irrigation District and Southern California Gas Company. Implementation
of the proposed project would increase the demand for electricity and natural gas. All projects within
the Imperial Irrigation District and Southern California Gas Company service areas would be required
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-7 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
to comply with the Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen, which would contribute to
minimizing wasteful energy consumption. With compliance of Building Energy Efficiency Standards and
CALGreen, cumulative impacts associated with the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and
proposed residential project would be less than significant and would not contribute considerably to
cumulative significant impacts to energy resources.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Implementation of the General Plan Amendment and the Zone Change would not increase geologic
risks above the level identified in the existing General Plan and would not contribute considerably to
potential cumulative significant impacts. Like other areas in southern California, land uses developed
under the General Plan, including the proposed project, could be subject to seismic shaking impacts
and would be required to meet the City's construction development standards and the seismic design
parameters of the California Uniform Building Code. The proposed project would be required to
implement geotechnical design measures recommended in the project geotechnical report to ensure
the stability of the project and implement erosion control measures to reduce erosion impacts. With
compliance of the California Uniform Building Code, geotechnical design measures and erosion control
measures, potential geologic impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the
General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential project would not contribute
to a cumulatively considerable impact with regard to geologic impacts.
The land clearing and grading activities that could occur from construction activities resulting from
implementation the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential project
would uncover soil, which could be subject to erosion impacts caused by water and wind. Additionally,
construction equipment and vehicles could indirectly transport sediment to offsite locations.
Compliance with applicable NPDES erosion control requirements would reduce impacts related to
substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil to a less than significant level. With the implementation
of Mitigation Measures GEO-1, GEO-2 and HYDRO-1, potential erosion impacts associated with the
General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential project would be less than
significant and would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact in regard to erosion
impacts.
Related cumulative projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would
be required to comply with California Building Code requirements to minimize potential geologic and
seismic impacts and would be required to implement erosion control plans to minimize potential
erosion and sedimentation impacts. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and
proposed residential project, considered with the cumulative development projects shown previously
in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would not contribute considerably to significant
cumulative geologic impacts.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase the population on the
project site above the level identified in the existing General Plan which would increase long-term
Greenhouse Gas emissions above the level currently estimated in the General Plan. GHG emissions are
not confined to a particular air basin but are dispersed worldwide. Therefore, the proposed project
greenhouse emission impacts are not project -specific impacts, but the proposed project's contribution
to cumulative GHG impacts. Implementation of the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and the
proposed residential project would not exceed the GHG emissions significance threshold of 3,000
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-8 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
MTCO2e/yr. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential
project GHG emissions and their contribution to global climate change would not be cumulatively
considerable, and GHG emissions impacts would be less than significant.
Related cumulative projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would
be evaluated for greenhouse gas emission impacts. As stated above, GHG impacts are recognized as
exclusively cumulative impacts, and there are no non -cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate
change perspective. The analysis above concludes that the project would not exceed the GHG
emissions significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr and would not interfere with the goals of SIB32.
When considered together, potential GHG impacts associated with the General Plan Amendment,
Zone Change, proposed residential project and cumulative development projects in the vicinity of the
project site would be less than significant.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment did not identify hazardous waste on the project site or
any listed hazardous waste sites near the project site. Implementation of the proposed General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would not increase the risk for hazardous
material impacts. The proposed residential project would involve the use of incidental amounts of
hazardous substances, such as fuel, oil, and solvents. To ensure hazardous substances are not
inadvertently released into the environment, the proposed residential project would be required to
comply with local, state, and federal laws regarding the handling, storage and transporting of
hazardous substances and would be required to comply with spill prevention and clean-up BMPs
during construction. With compliance with local, state, and federal laws and implementation of BMPs,
the potential handling of hazardous materials would be less than significant. Therefore, the General
Plan Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would not contribute to a
cumulatively considerable impact with regard to the release of hazardous materials into the
environment. Because of the historic agricultural use that occurred on the project site, it is
recommended that a Phase II investigation be conducted to assess the presence or absence of
environmentally persistent agricultural chemicals within near surface soils. With implementation of
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, the potential for the project to create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment would be less than significant.
Related cumulative projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would
be evaluated for potential hazards and potential release of hazardous substances into the
environment. The related cumulative projects would be required to comply with local, state and
federal laws and regulations regarding the handling, storage and transporting of hazardous materials.
Compliance with local, state and federal laws would reduce the potential impacts to less than
significant. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and the proposed residential
project, considered with related cumulative projects, would not result in significant cumulative hazards
or hazardous material impacts.
The proposed residential project was determined to have a less than significant impact to interfering
with an emergency evacuation plan. Cumulative projects in the area would be analyzed for impairment
of emergency access on a project -by -project basis and would be required to comply with all roadway
design standards to ensure adequate emergency access is not impacted. Therefore, the General Plan
Amendment, the Zone Change, the proposed residential project, and related cumulative projects
within the vicinity of the project site would have a less than significant cumulative impact to interfering
with emergency plans.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-9 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Construction activities associated with the proposed residential project implemented under the
proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change could have the potential to generate degraded
surface water impacts which could adversely affect downstream receiving water bodies. The proposed
residential project would be required to adhere to the City of La Quinta NPDES MS4 Storm Water
Permit requirement, which would be to obtain a State General Construction Permit, filing a Notice of
Intent (NCI) to the Storm Water Report Tracking System and obtain a waste discharger identification
number from the State Water Resources Control Board. Additionally, the General Construction Permit
would require the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). The SWPPP would identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize degraded surface
water runoff impacts. With compliance of the General Construction Permit requirements and
preparation and implementation of the SWPPP, potential erosion impacts would be less than
significant. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential
project would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact to hydrology and water quality.
Cumulative development projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects,
would have the potential to affect water quality during the construction phase. Related cumulative
development that disturbs one or more acres of soil would be required to obtain coverage under the
NPDES General Construction Permit and would avoid and/or reduce construction -related impacts to
water quality through preparation of a site -specific SWPPP, which identifies applicable BMPs. Each
project would be required to comply with existing water quality standards at the time of development
review and implement BMPs, as necessary. Thus, related cumulative development projects would not
contribute considerably to cumulatively significant hydrology and water quality impacts.
LAND USE
Implementation of the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential
project would not construct any structures or barriers that would divide existing communities.
The General Plan Amendment would redesignate the project site from Low Density Residential up to
4.0 dwelling units per acre to Medium -High Density up to 16 dwelling units per acre.
The proposed residential project would increase the density on the site to 9.0 dwelling units per acre
and would allow an additional 41 dwelling units to be developed on the project site, which would be
well below the maximum residential units that could be developed. The increased density would not
result in significant impacts to the environment and would not contribute considerably to cumulative
significant impacts to the environment. The proposed residential project is consistent with relevant
goals and policies of the City of La Quinta General Plan and would not contribute cumulative land use
policy conflicts.
The proposed General Plan Amendment would not result in the development of incompatible land
uses that would not contribute considerably to cumulative significant land use impacts to the
environment. Related development projects would be subject to site -specific planning reviews that
would address consistency with adopted General Plan goals, policies, and objectives, as well as with
the local development code standards. Each cumulative development project would be analyzed
independent of other projects, within the context of their respective land use and regulatory setting.
As part of the review process, each project would be required to demonstrate compliance with the
provisions of the applicable land use designation(s). Additionally, as part of the planning reviews,
related projects would be subject to CEQA environmental review, where needed projects would be
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-10 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
required to provide mitigation to reduce potential adverse impacts to the environment. Thus,
implementation of the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, development of the proposed
residential project, and cumulative development projects would not contribute considerably to
significant cumulative land use impacts.
NOISE
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase population and associated
traffic generated from the project site above the level identified in the existing General Plan which
would increase long-term traffic noise levels above levels currently estimated in the existing General
Plan for the project site. The proposed project's long-term operational mobile and stationary noise
impacts were determined to be less than significant. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, the
Zone Change and the proposed residential project would not contribute considerably to significant
cumulative noise impacts. Related cumulative projects would be required to comply with applicable
noise and vibration standards, and regulations to minimize noise and vibration impacts. Therefore, the
General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and the proposed residential project, considered with the
related cumulative projects, would not result in significant cumulative noise impacts.
Cumulatively significant construction vibration would occur when construction activities at a site occur
in close vicinity of one another in a way that concentrates the vibration. The further construction
activities occur from one another on each respective project site, the quicker the vibration dissipates
by the time it reaches a sensitive receptor. Because heavy construction equipment moves around a
project site and would only occur for limited durations, the average vibration levels at nearby
structures would diminish rapidly with increasing distance between structures. There are no ongoing
or planned construction activities near the project site that would contribute to cumulative vibration
impacts. In addition, groundborne vibration generated at the site during construction would not be in
exceedance of the Caltrans threshold of 0.25 inch per second peak particle velocity (PPV) and long-
term vibration impacts from operations at the site would be less than significant. Therefore, the
project's contribution to cumulative vibration impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
POPULATION AND HOUSING
The Southern California Association of Governments Connect SoCal, 2020 — 2045 RTP/SCS, forecasts
that the population of La Quinta will grow to 47,700 in 2045, an increase of approximately 0.15% over
the 2018 population. The additional population increase generated from the proposed project would
account for 0.017% of the estimated population growth. The estimated population increase would be
in the range of estimated future growth projections and would not be considered substantial
unplanned housing growth. As such, the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed
residential project would not contribute to cumulatively adverse growth impacts. Related projects
identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would be reviewed by the City, and
development would be required to be consistent with adopted state and City development standards,
regulations, plans, and policies to minimize the effect of the increase in population on physical impacts
to the environment. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed
residential project, combined with related projects, would not result in cumulatively considerable
impacts to population and housing as no substantial new unplanned growth would occur.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-11 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PUBLIC SERVICES
Fire Protection
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase demands for fire protection
services above the level identified in the existing General Plan. The proposed residential project and
related cumulative development projects would receive fire protection services from the Riverside
County Fire Department. According to the Riverside County Fire Department, the proposed residential
project would not require the expansion of fire protection facilities or services. Additionally, the project
would be required to comply with the California Building Code, California Fire Code and related codes
and would be reviewed by the Riverside County Fire Department to ensure it has been designed in
compliance with fire protection safety requirements. The Riverside County Fire Department would
review all cumulative development projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative
Projects, and, if needed, would identify if additional fire protection facilities would be necessary.
Additionally, cumulative development projects would be subject to all applicable laws, ordinances, and
regulations in place for fire protection and emergency services, which would help to reduce potential
cumulative impacts for fire protection services. The overall cumulative impacts to fire protection
services would be less than significant.
Police Protection
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would increase demands for police
protection services above the level identified in the existing General Plan. The proposed residential
project and related cumulative development projects would receive police protection services from
the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. The project would be required to comply with all applicable
laws, ordinances, and regulations in place for police protection services. The General Plan Amendment,
Zone Change and proposed project's cumulative impacts to police protection services would be less
than significant and would not contribute to cumulatively significant impacts. Cumulative development
projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would also be evaluated for
potential impacts to police services and would be required to comply with all applicable laws,
ordinances, and regulations in place for police protection services. Compliance with protection
ordinances and regulations would reduce cumulative development project impacts to police services
to less than significant. Overall, cumulative impacts to police protection services would be less than
significant.
School Services
The proposed General Plan Amendment would increase the population on the project site above the
level identified in the existing General Plan and would incrementally increase the enrollment of
students and the use of CVUSD facilities. As identified in Section 4.15, Public Services, the proposed
project would have a less than significant impact on school services. The proposed residential project
would be required to pay development fees prior to issuance of a building permit to offset the cost of
providing school services and facilities. Related development projects identified previously in Table
4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would be evaluated for potential impacts to schools and would
be required to pay development fees to fund existing and future school facilities. With coordination
with CVUSD and the payment of development fees, potential cumulative impacts to school services
would be less than significant.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-12 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1 Cam► '�C � •\
In order to make a realistic estimate of future on -street conditions prior to implementation of the
project, the status of other known development projects (cumulative projects) has been researched
at La Quinta and Riverside County. With this information, the potential impact of the proposed project
can be evaluated within the context of the cumulative impact of all ongoing development. As shown
previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, there are ten cumulative projects in La Quinta
and four cumulative projects in Riverside County that have either been built, but not yet fully occupied,
or are being processed for approval. These 14 cumulative projects have been included as part of the
cumulative background setting.
Table 4.21-2, Cumulative Proeect Traffic Generation, presents the development totals and resultant trip
generation for the 14 cumulative projects. As shown in Table 4.21-2, the 14 cumulative projects are
forecast to generate a combined total of 19,039 weekday daily trips, with 1,136 trips forecast during
the AM peak hour and 1,457 trips forecast during the PM peak hour. It should be noted that the trip
generation in Table 4.21-2 reflects the remaining dwelling units to be constructed and/or occupied in
the tracts under construction based on LLG research/reconnaissance. The anticipated AM peak hour
and PM peak hour cumulative projects traffic volumes at the key study intersections are presented in
Figure 4.21-2, AM Peak Hour Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes, and Figure 4.21-3, PM Peak Hour
Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes.
Table 4.21-2
Cumulative Project Traffic Generation
Cumulative Project
Daily 2-
Way
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
In
Out
Total
it
Out
Total
City of La Quinta
Capistrano (139 DU)
1,311
25
72
97
83
48
131
Piazza Serena (51 DU)
481
9
27
36
30
18
48
Stone Creek (66 DU)
622
12
34
46
39
23
62
Signature at PGQ West (100 DU)
674
10
30
40
32
19
51
Cantera
802
16
44
60
50
30
80
Andalusia Country Club
594
11
33
44
37
22
59
Andalusia TTM
509
10
28
38
32
19
51
Malaga TTM 33597
538
10
30
40
34
20
54
Monroe Dates
886
17
49
66
55
33
88
TTM No.34642
849
16
47
63
54
31
85
County of Riverside
TR 37192
1,867
36
103
139
117
69
186
TTM 38136
2,178
42
120
162
137
80
217
Vista Santa Rosa Gateway Village
6,974
137
112
249
132
138
270
TR 36902
754
15
41
56
47
28
75
Total
19,039
366
770
1,136
879
578
1,457
Source: LLG, Traffic Impact Analysis Report; August 17, 2022.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-13 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 4.21-3, Existing with Ambient Growth With Project With Cumulative Projects, summarizes the
peak hour level of service results at the three (3) key study intersections for "Existing With Ambient
Growth With Project With Cumulative Projects" traffic conditions. Table 4.21-3 shows that for existing
with ambient growth with project with cumulative projects traffic conditions, all three key
intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours.
All critical movements for the all -way stop -controlled intersections are also expected to operate at
acceptable levels of service per City requirements.
Table 4.21-3
Existing with Ambient Growth With Project With Cumulative Projects
Tr
ME
Existing with Ambient
Existing Traffic
Growth with Project with
Minimum
Conditions
Cumulative Traffic
Deficiency
KeyIntersection
Time
Period
Acceptable
p
Conditions
LOS
Delay
LOS
ell
LOS
Increase
Yes/N
Madison Street at
AM
8.4
A
9.8
A
1.4
No
Avenue 58
PM
LOS D
9.4
A
10.8
B
1.4
No
Via Pasatiempo at
AM
8.7
A
9.3
A
0.6
No
LOS D
Avenue 58
PM
9.5
A
9.4
A
0.09
No
Monroe Street at
AM
8.1
A
11.9
B
3.8
No
LOS D
Avenue 58
PM
10.8
B
19.3
C
8.5
No
Source: LLG, Traffic Impact Analysis Report; August 17, 2022.
Year 2045 With Project Traffic Conditions
The project has been evaluated for future impacts in 2045 with cumulative development occurring.
Table 4.21-4, Year 2045 with Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity, shows the peak hour level of
service results at the three key study intersections for "Year 2045 With Project" traffic conditions. With
project traffic conditions, all three key study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable levels
of service during the AM and PM peak hours. It should be noted that all critical movements for the all -
way stop -controlled intersections are forecast to also operate at acceptable levels of service per City
requirements.
Table 4.21-4
Year 2045 with Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity
Existing Traffic
Year 2045
Year 2045
Minimum
Conditions
without
with Project
Deficiency
Key Intersection
Time
Acceptable
Project
Period
LOS
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS
Increase
Yes/No
(s0_
/v)
(s/v)
(s/v)
AL.-
Madison Street at
AM
8.4
A
9.6
A
9.7
A
0.1
No
LOS D
Avenue 58
PM
9.4
A
10.6
B
10.7
B
0.1
No
Via Pasatiempo at
AM
8.7
A
9.2
A
9.3
A
0.1
No
LOS D
Avenue 58
PM
9.5
A
9.3
A
9.4
A
0.1
No
Monroe Street at
AM
8.1
A
12.0
B
12.0
B
0.3
No
Avenue 58
PM
LOS D
10.8
B
20.0
C
20.0
C
0.7
No
Source: LLG, Traffic Impact Analysis Report; August 17, 2022.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-14 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Source: Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers; August 17, 2022.
N�
/N r7 '-- 11 \
18
62: '
\ 3oy /
o rn o
MADISON ST
58TH AVE
D /--�
IJ � r— 0
�\ 35� � r /
00 /
MONROE ST
58TH AVE
/ 04 1 \
J � — 17
30—
VIA PASATIEMPO
58TH AVE
KEY
® = STUDY INTERSECTION
= PROJECT SITE
LAVILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
AM Peak Hour Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes
VCS Environmental
Figure 4.21-2
Source: Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers; August 17, 2022.
N�
7
03
42-4
\ 26— /
MADISON ST @
58TH AVE
0
/ HMO f 6
.�i�' 0
29' /
- c-
\ f �/
MONROE ST Q
58TH AVE
/ oo 17
) 32
14-
\ 24— /
\ /
VIA PASATIEMPO
58TH AVE
KEY
® = STUDY INTERSECTION
= PROJECT SITE
LAVILLETTA AT AVENUE 58 PROJECT
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PM Peak Hour Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes
VCS Environmental
Figure 4.21-3
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute considerably to significant cumulative traffic
impacts. Striping improvements are recommended along the project frontage on Avenue 58 in
conjunction with the widening of the project frontage to the ultimate width.
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would not
increase impacts to tribal resources above the level of impacts identified in the existing General Plan
and would not contribute considerably to potential cumulative significant impacts of tribal resources.
Cumulative development projects would be evaluated for impacts to tribal resources. To avoid
significant impacts to unknown tribal cultural resources that could be present on the project site, the
proposed project would be required to comply with Mitigation Measure CR-1, which requires project
monitoring by a Native American and proper consultation with Native American Tribes and the Native
American Heritage Commission if subsurface tribal cultural resources are found during construction,
excavation, and/or other construction activities in the area. This would eliminate any potential loss of
important tribal cultural resources that may be discovered at the project site. Compliance with
Mitigation Measure CR-1 would ensure that a cumulative loss of tribal cultural resources from the
project construction activities would not occur. Additionally, the project would comply with Mitigation
Measure CR-2, which requires if human remains are encountered during excavation activities, all work
shall halt, and the County Coroner shall be notified. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, the Zone
Change and the proposed residential project would not result in a cumulatively considerable
contribution to impacts related to tribal cultural resources, and impacts would be less than significant.
Related cumulative development projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative
Projects, would be required to comply with the provisions of AB 52, which would reduce cumulative
impacts to tribal cultural resources. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and
the proposed residential project, considered with the related cumulative projects, would not result in
significant cumulative impacts to cultural tribal resources.
UTI LITI ES
Water
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would
increase water demands above the level identified in the existing General Plan and in the Coachella
Valley Water District (CVWD) Urban Water Management Plan. However, the overall water demand for
the project would be less. The reduction in water demand would be a result of the cluster residential
development common area landscaping, use of energy efficient water fixtures, minimal turf grass for
park/playground area, and use of decomposed granite for landscaping. The proposed project would
have approximately 46% less demand for water compared to water demands under the existing
General Plan Low Density land use designation. Therefore, the project would not contribute
considerably to significant cumulative water supply impacts.
Related development projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would
also be evaluated for water demands and consistency with the CVWD Urban Water Management Plan
to determine if adequate water supplies would be available. Related development projects would be
required to incorporate water conserving features and would be required to coordinate with CVWD to
ensure compliance with relevant laws and regulations to reduce cumulative water demand impacts.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-17 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Wastewater
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would
increase population and would increase wastewater treatment demands above the level identified for
in the existing General Plan. Wastewater treatment service for the project area would be provided
from the Mid -Valley Water Reclamation Plant (WRP-4) which has available treatment capacity for the
proposed residential project, including the incremental increase demand from the General Plan
Amendment. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential
project would not considerably contribute to significant cumulative wastewater treatment capacity
impacts. Additionally, as part of the final design, the proposed project would be required to coordinate
with CVWD and secure a Will Serve Letter which would ensure that the CVWD would have the ability
to provide adequate wastewater service to the proposed project. The design of the wastewater
distribution system would be required to coordinate with CVWD to ensure that they are adequately
sized to meet the long-term operational needs for the project.
Related development projects identified previously in Table 4.21-1, Related Cumulative Projects, would
also be required to coordinate with CVWD to determine if adequate wastewater treatment capacity
would be available and would be required to comply with the relevant regulations. Coordination with
CVWD and compliance with relevant laws and regulations would ensure the General Plan Amendment,
the Zone Change and the proposed residential project impacts related to the construction of
wastewater facilities are not significantly cumulatively considerable.
Solid Waste Disposal
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would
increase population and would increase solid waste disposal demands above the level identified for in
the existing General Plan. The proposed project and related development projects would increase
demand for solid waste disposal services within the project area. Solid waste disposal for the proposed
project would be from Burrtec Waste and Recycling Services, LLC (Burrtec) under a franchise
agreement with the City. Burrtec collects solid waste and transports it to the Edom Hill Transfer
Station, located west of the City in the City of Cathedral City. From the Transfer Station, waste is taken
to one of three regional landfills: Lamb Canyon, Badlands or El Sobrante. All three landfills have
capacity remaining for the long-term. Therefore, the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and
the proposed residential project would not considerably contribute to significant cumulative solid
waste disposal impacts. Cumulative related development projects identified previously in Table 4.21-
1, Related Cumulative Projects, would be required to coordinate if adequate solid waste disposal
service is available and would be subject to conformance with all relevant laws, ordinances, and
regulations in place for solid waste disposal. This includes compliance with AB 939, which requires a
50% diversion of all solid waste from disposal in local landfills, and the 2016 (or most recent) California
Green Building Code Standards, which includes design and construction measures that act to reduce
construction -related waste though material conservation measures and other construction -related
efficiency measures. With compliance with relevant laws, ordinances, and regulations in place for solid
waste disposal, cumulative impacts to solid waste would be less than significant.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-18 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated: Implementation of the General Plan
Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed project would not have environmental effects which
would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Potential
impacts that could cause substantial adverse effects on human beings were analyzed in this Initial
Study include, but are not limited to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, geology hazards, hazardous
materials, seismic hazards, hydrology/water quality, noise and wildfire. Each issue area found that
there would be either no impacts, impacts would be less than significant, or impacts would be less
than significant with mitigation incorporated. The proposed residential project and cumulative
development projects would comply with local and regional planning programs, applicable codes, and
ordinances, state and federal laws and regulations, and mitigation measures to ensure that long-term
operation activities and short-term construction activities associated with the proposed project would
not result in direct, or indirect adverse impacts to human beings.
d) Have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage
of long-term environmental goals?
Less Than Significant Impact: The General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed
residential project would not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the
disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. If the proposed project is approved and constructed,
a variety of short- and long-term impacts would occur. During construction, surrounding land uses
could be temporarily impacted by dust and noise. There could also be an increase in vehicle pollutant
emissions caused by grading and construction activities and potential generation of degraded surface
water. However, these short-term effects would be temporary and would be avoided or lessened to a
large degree through implementation of mitigation measures and compliance with regulatory
requirements. Implementation of the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed
project would result in long-term environmental consequences associated with increasing population
above the existing General Plan and the transition of land use from vacant land to residential land uses.
Long-term operation of the General Plan Amendment, the Zone Change and the proposed residential
project would change the physical appearance of the project site and would contribute increased
traffic volumes, increased noise from the operation of the project, increased amounts of impervious
surfaces and increased energy and natural resource consumption. However, these long-term
operational effects would be reduced to a less than significant level through implementation of
mitigation measures and compliance with regulatory requirements. Construction and operation of the
project would not result in significant adverse effects to the environment. Therefore, the General Plan
Amendment, Zone Change and proposed residential project would not achieve short-term
environmental goals that would result in the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.21-19 Mandatory Findings of Significance
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4.22 References
The following references were utilized during preparation of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration. These documents are available for review at the City of La Quinta Planning Department,
78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 92253.
Bruin Geotechnical Services, Inc., Geotechnical Engineering Report. September 9, 2021.
Coachella Valley Water District, Urban Water Management Plan; Adopted 2020.
D&D Engineering, Inc., Preliminary Hydrology Study. February 28, 2023.
D&D Engineering, Inc., TTM 37950 Water Quality Management Plan. February 28, 2023.
Kevin L. Crook Architect Inc., Avenue 58 Architectural Package. July 18, 2022.
Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers, Traffic Impact Analysis Report. August 17, 2022.
Linscott, Law and Greenspan, Engineers, Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Assessmentfor the Proposed
Tentative Tract Map No. 37950 Project. October 12, 2021.
Partner Engineering and Science, Inc., Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report. July 23, 2019.
Todd Groundwater and Woodard & Curran, 2022 Indio Subbasin Water Management Plan Update;
December 2021.
Urbana Preservation & Planning, LLC, Historical Resource Analysis Report 81891 Avenue 58, La
Quinta, CA. May 2022.
VCS Environmental, Biological Technical Report for Tentative Tract Map 37950 Project. October
2021.
VCS Environmental, Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the Lo Quinta Cluster Development
Project — Tentative Tract Map 37950. August 2021.
Vista Environmental, Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis Tentative
Tract Map No. 37950 Residential Project. October 28, 2021.
Vista Environmental, Noise Impact Analysis Tentative Tract Map No. 37950 Residential Project.
October 19, 2021.
VLA Group, Preliminary Landscape Plan. November 18, 2022.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 4.22-1 References
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
5.0 INVENTORY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1310-1: CVMSCHP Mitigation Fee. The project proponent shall be required to pay the City of La
Quinta a local development mitigation fee prior to obtaining a building permit. The most
current rates are as follows (future developments may be subject to updated fees).
BIO-2: A pre-construction/clearance burrowing owl survey shall be performed not more than 30
days prior to initial ground disturbance activity to map the location of suitable burrows, if
any, and to formally determine presence/absence of the species. A qualified biologist will
survey the project site and a buffer zone, 500-feet outside the project limits for burrows
that could be used by burrowing owls. If the burrow is determined to be occupied, the
burrow will be flagged, and a 160-foot diameter buffer will be established during non -
breeding season or a 250-foot diameter buffer during the breeding season. If burrows
onsite are unoccupied, construction may proceed.
If the site survey determines the presence of burrowing owl, mitigation in accordance with
the CDFW shall be implemented as follows:
• If burrowing owls are identified as being resident onsite outside the breeding
season (September 1 to February 14) they may be relocated to other sites by a
permitted biologist (permitted by CDFW), as allowed in the CDFW Staff Report on
Burrowing Owl Mitigation (March 2012).
If an active burrow is found during the breeding season, the burrow shall be treated
as a nest site and temporary fencing shall be installed at a distance from the active
burrow, to be determined by the biologist, to prevent disturbance during grading
or construction. Installation and removal of the fencing shall be done with a
biological monitor present.
• Active relocation and eviction/passive relocation require the preservation and
maintenance of suitable burrowing owl habitat determined through coordination
with the Wildlife Agencies.
1310-3: Vegetation removal activities shall be conducted outside the nesting season (September 1
to February 14 for songbirds; September 1 to January 14 for raptors) to avoid potential
impacts to nesting birds.
Any construction activities that occur during the nesting season (February 15 to August 31
for songbirds; January 15 to August 31 for raptors) will require that all suitable habitats be
thoroughly surveyed for the presence of nesting birds by a qualified biologist within three
days before commencement of vegetation clearing/ground disturbance activities. If any
active nests are detected, a buffer of 500 feet of an active listed species or raptor nest, 300
feet of other sensitive bird nests (non -listed), and 100 feet of most common songbird nests
will be delineated, flagged, and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete. The buffer may
be modified and/or other recommendations proposed as determined appropriate by the
biological monitor to minimize impacts.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 5-1 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
BIO-4a: Prior to construction, all suitable areas within the project site shall be surveyed for the
presence of bat roosts by a qualified bat biologist. Initial surveys are recommended to be
conducted between one year to six months prior to the initiation of vegetation removal
and ground disturbing activities, ideally during the maternity season (typically March 1 to
August 31), to allow time to prepare mitigation and/or exclusion plans if needed. Surveys
may entail direct inspection of the trees or nighttime surveys. If active bat roosts are
present, a qualified bat biologist shall determine the species of bats present and the type
of roost (i.e., day roost, night roost, maternity roost). If the biologist determines that the
roosting bats are not a special -status species and the roost is not being used as a maternity
roost, then the bats may be evicted from the roost by a qualified bat biologist experienced
in developing and implementing bat mitigation and exclusion plans.
• If special -status bat species or a maternity roost of any bat species is present, but
no direct removal of active roosts will occur, a qualified bat biologist shall
determine appropriate avoidance measures, which may include implementation
of a construction -free buffer around the active roost.
• If special -status bat species or a maternity roost of any bat species is present and
direct removal of habitat (roost location) will occur, then a qualified bat biologist
experienced in developing bat mitigation and exclusion plans shall develop a
mitigation plan to compensate for the lost roost site. Removal of the roost shall
only occur when the mitigation plan has been approved by the City and only when
bats are not present in the roost. The mitigation plan shall detail the methods of
excluding bats from the roost and the plans for a replacement roost in the vicinity
of the project site. The mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for approval
prior to implementation. The plan shall include: (1) a description of the species
targeted for mitigation; (2) a description of the existing roost or roost sites; (3)
methods to be used to exclude the bats if necessary; (4) methods to be used to
secure the existing roost site to prevent its reuse prior to removal; (5) the location
for a replacement roost structure; (6) design details for the construction of the
replacement roost; (7) monitoring protocols for assessing replacement roost use;
(8) a schedule for excluding bats, demolishing of the existing roost, and
construction of the replacement roost; and (9) contingency measures to be
implemented if the replacement roosts do not function as designed.
BIO-4b: Pre -construction surveys shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist no more than two
weeks prior to the initiation of vegetation removal and ground disturbing activities. If no
active roosts are present, then trees shall be removed within two weeks following the
survey.
BIO-4c: All potential roost trees (including palm trees) shall be removed in a manner approved by
a qualified bat biologist outside the maternity season (March 15 — August 31 in the
Coachella Valley which coincides with the bird nesting season) to avoid the potential for
"take" of nonvolant (flightless) young.
Trees and snags that have been identified as confirmed or potential roost sites require a
two-step removal process and the involvement of a bat biologist to ensure that no roosting
bats are killed during this activity. Consistent with CDFW protocols this two-step removal
Public Review Draft I June 2023 5-2 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
shall occur over two consecutive days as follows: on Day 1, branches and limbs not
containing cavities, as identified by a qualified bat biologist, will be removed. On Day 2, the
remainder of the tree may be removed without supervision by a bat biologist. The
disturbance caused by limb removal, followed by an interval of one evening, will allow bats
to safely abandon the roost.
BIO-4d: All construction activity in the vicinity of an active roost shall be limited to daylight hours.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
CR-1: Based on the data presented, it is recommended that archaeological monitoring and
Native American monitoring (if applicable) occur during project excavations into alluvial
soils, estimated to occur within near surface soils to a depth of 5 to 10 feet. These
Mitigation Measures for the project outline the monitoring protocols.
A MMRP to mitigate potential impacts to undiscovered buried cultural resources within
the project shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Lead Agency. This program shall
include, but not be limited to, the following actions:
1) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written verification
that a certified archaeologist has been retained to implement the monitoring
program. This verification shall be presented in a letter from the project
archaeologist to the Lead Agency.
2) The project applicant shall provide Native American monitoring during grading if
the Lead Agency determines it is necessary pending results of the AB 52
Consultation process. If applicable, the Native American monitor shall work in
concert with the archaeological monitor to observe ground disturbances and
search for cultural materials. The Lead Agency shall coordinate with the consulting
Tribe(s) to facilitate communications with the project developer/applicant so that
all parties can develop a mutually acceptable Tribal Monitoring and Treatment
Agreement which includes the scope of monitoring, scheduling of monitors from
individual consulting Tribe(s), and the course of action for inadvertent discoveries.
3) The project archaeologist, in consultation with the consulting Tribe(s), the
contractor, and the City, shall implement a Cultural Resources Management Plan
(CRMP) to address the details, timing and responsibility of all archaeological and
cultural activities that will occur on the project site. Details in the plan shall include:
a. Project grading and development scheduling.
b. The project archaeologist and the Consulting Tribes(s) shall attend the pre -
grading meeting with the City, the construction manager and all
contractors and will conduct a mandatory Cultural Resources Worker
Sensitivity Training to those in attendance. The training will include a brief
review of the cultural sensitivity of the project and the surrounding area;
what resources could potentially be identified during earthmoving
activities; the requirements of the monitoring program; the protocols that
apply in the event inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources are
identified, including who to contact and appropriate avoidance measures
Public Review Draft I June 2023 5-3 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
until the find(s) can be properly evaluated; and any other appropriate
protocols.
c. The protocols and stipulations that the contractor, City, Consulting Tribe(s)
and project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural
resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource
deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resource evaluation.
4) During the original cutting of previously undisturbed deposits, the archaeological
and Tribal monitors (if applicable) shall be onsite, as determined by the consulting
archaeologist, to perform periodic inspections of the excavations. Monitoring is
recommended in younger Holocene alluvial soils, estimated to occur within near
surface soils to a depth of 5 to 10 feet. The frequency of inspections will depend
upon the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and the presence and
abundance of artifacts and features. The consulting archaeologist shall have the
authority to modify the monitoring program if the potential for cultural resources
appears to be less than anticipated.
5) Isolates and clearly non -significant deposits will be minimally documented in the
field so the monitored grading can proceed.
6) In the event that previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered, the
archaeologist shall have the authority to divert or temporarily halt ground
disturbance operations in the area of the discovery to allow for the evaluation of
potentially significant cultural resources. The archaeologist shall contact the Lead
Agency at the time of the discovery. The archaeologist, in consultation with the
lead agency, shall determine the significance of the discovered resources. The Lead
Agency must concur with the evaluation before construction activities will be
allowed to resume in the affected area. For significant cultural resources, a
Research Design and Data Recovery Program to mitigate impacts shall be
implemented by the consulting archaeologist and approved by the Lead Agency
before being carried out, using professional archaeological methods. If any human
bones are discovered, the county coroner and lead agency shall be contacted. In
the event that the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the
Most Likely Descendant (as identified by the NAHC) shall be contacted in order to
determine proper treatment and disposition of the remains.
a. Before construction activities are allowed to resume in the affected area,
the artifacts shall be recovered, and features recorded using professional
archaeological methods. The project archaeologist, in consultation with
the consulting Tribe(s), shall determine the amount of material to be
recovered for an adequate artifact sample for analysis.
b. One or more of the following treatments, in order of preference, shall be
used in the event of a discovery:
Preservation -in -Place. Avoidance, or preservation -in -place,
involves leaving a resource where it was found with no
development affecting its integrity. Pursuant to Public Resources
Public Review Draft I June 2023 5-4 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of
preservation for archaeological and cultural resources.
ii. Reburial on the project site in an area not subject to future
disturbance. Reburial of a resource shall include provisions to
protect the selected reburial area from any future impacts in
perpetuity. Reburial shall not occur until all required cataloging and
basic recording have been completed, with the exception of sacred
items, burial goods and Native American human remains. Any
reburial process shall be culturally appropriate. The listing of
contents and the location of the reburial shall be included in a
confidential Phase IV Monitoring Report.
c. If Preservation -in -Place or reburial is not feasible, all cultural material
collected during the grading monitoring program shall be processed and
curated according to the current professional repository standards in a
Riverside County curation facility that meets State Resources Department
Office of Historic Preservation Guidelines for the Curation of
Archaeological Resources (OHP 1993). The collections and associated
records shall be transferred, including title and accompanied by payment
of the fees necessary for permanent curation.
7) A Phase IV Monitoring Report, documenting the field and analysis results and
interpreting the artifact and research data within the research context, shall be
completed and submitted to the satisfaction of the Lead Agency prior to the
issuance of any building permits. The report will include DPR Primary and
Archaeological Site Forms. The Phase IV report shall be filed with the City under a
confidential cover and not subject to a Public Records Request and a copy of the
report shall be submitted to the consulting Tribe(s).
CR-2: Project related earth disturbance has the potential to unearth previously undiscovered
human remains, resulting in a potentially significant impact. Pursuant to Section 7050.5 of
the California Health and Safety Code, if human remains are encountered during
excavation activities, all work shall halt, and the County Coroner shall be notified. The
Coroner would determine within two working days whether a cause of death investigation
is necessary. If the Coroner determines that the remains are Native American, he/she
would contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The
NAHC would then, pursuant to Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code,
immediately identify the most likely descendant (MLD), who may inspect the remains and
site of discovery and make recommendations for the treatment and/or disposition of the
remains. The MLD shall make his/her recommendation within 48 hours of being granted
access to the site. The MLD's recommendation shall be followed, if feasible, and may
include scientific removal and non-destructive analysis of the human remains, preservation
in place, and deeding the remains to the MLD for treatment. If no MLD is identified, the
MILD fails to make a recommendation, or the landowner rejects the recommendation, the
landowner shall rebury the remains with appropriate dignity on the property in a location
that would not be subject to further subsurface disturbance.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 5-5 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
HYDRO-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant will obtain coverage under a General
Construction Permit issued from the State Water Resources Control Board. The General
Construction Permit would require the filing of a Notice of Intent with the State Water
Resources Control Board and the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP).
GEO-1: During construction, Grading Plans for the project shall implement fugitive dust control
measures and windborne erosion control measures from the Coachella Valley PM10 State
Implementation Plan.
GEO-2: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the City of La Quinta shall confirm that grading and
construction plans for the project incorporate design recommendations provided in the
Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Bruin Geotechnical Services, Inc., September
2021. The design recommendations shall address site earthwork; remedial grading for
building pads; asphalt, pavement, and concrete; fill placement and compaction; soil
shrinkage; fill slope stability; imported soils; post grading pad drainage foundation design
recommendations; retaining walls and structures; corrosion and chemical attack;
excavations; utility trenches and backfill; interior concrete; exterior concrete rigid
pavement; pavement design; and construction considerations.
PALEO-1: Once earthmoving reaches 3-5 feet below the original ground surface, excavation shall be
monitored under the direct guidance of a qualified paleontologist.
PALEO-2: The project paleontologist retained shall review the approved development plan and shall
conduct any pre -construction work necessary to render appropriate monitoring and
mitigation requirements as appropriate. These requirements shall be documented by the
project paleontologist in a Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP).
This PRIMP shall be submitted to the City's Design and Development Department for
review and approval prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. Information to be contained in
the PRIMP shall meet the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards.
PALEO-3: If paleontological resources are detected and recovered during monitoring, a report must
be prepared. The following items must be presented in the report: recovered specimens
must be prepared to a point of identification and permanent preservation, including
washing of sediments to recover small invertebrates and vertebrates. The recovered fossils
must be identified and curated into a professional, fully accredited museum repository
with permanent retrievable storage (e.g., WSC). The paleontologist must have a written
repository agreement in hand prior to the initiation of mitigation activities. The report and
inventory, when submitted to the Lead Agency, will signify completion of the program to
mitigate impacts to paleontological resources.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HAZ-1: Prior to grading, a Phase II investigation will be conducted to assess the presence or
absence of environmentally persistent agricultural chemicals within near surface soils.
Public Review Draft I June 2023
5-6
Inventory of Mitigation Measures
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
HYDRO-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant will obtain coverage under a General
Construction Permit issued from the State Water Resources Control Board. The General
Construction Permit would require the filing of a Notice of Intent with the State Water
Resources Control Board and the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP).
TRANSPORTATION
T-1: The existing striping along Avenue 58, which includes a center striped median, is
recommended to be modified to create a 60-foot westbound left turn pocket at the main
project driveway while providing a ±90-foot eastbound left turn pocket at Pasatiempo
Court.
Public Review Draft I June 2023 5-7 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
LA VILLETTA AT AVENUE 58
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
6.0 REPORT PREPARATION PERSONNEL
CITY OF LA QUINTA (LEAD AGENCY)
Planning Department
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Cheri Flores, Planning Manager
Siji Fernandez, Associate Planner
VCS ENVIRONMENTAL (ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS)
30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 100
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
Julie Beeman, President
Dan Bott, Project Manager
Valerie Flores, Environmental Planner
Patrick Maxon, RPA, Archaeologist
Wade Caffrey, Biologist
Carla Marriner, Senior Biologist
Chris Eljenholm, Biologist
CJ Fotheringham, Ph.D., Botanist
Max Ketabi, GIS Specialist
Linda Bo, Production Coordinator
Public Review Draft I June 2023 6-1 Report Preparation Personnel