Loading...
EA 2014-1002 La Quinta SquareEXHIBIT "A" NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION To: From: County Clerk County of Riverside Attention: Tammy Marshall 2724 Gateway_ Drive Riverside, CA 92507 City of La Quinta Attn: Les Johnson 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta. CA 92253 Subject: The City of La Quinta intends to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2014- 1002 in compliance with Section 21092 et.seq. of the Public Resources Code, with respect to the project more fully described herein. Project Title: Environmental Assessment 2014-1002; Site Development Permit 2014-1005; Tentative Parcel Map 2014-1003 (TPM 36791), Minor Adjustments 2014-0008 and 2014-0009 La Quinta Square State Clearinghouse Number Lead Agency/Contact Person Telephone N/A City of La Quinta/Les Johnson 760-777-7125 Project Location (include County): Southwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Simon Drive, within the City of La Quinta, County of Riverside. Project Description: The project proposes a total of 30,270 square feet of building area, including: 1) 3,750 square foot fast food restaurant with drive -through and 1,000 square feet of outdoor seating; 2) 17,020 square foot food market, and 3) 8,500 square foot retail building. The project also includes parking lots, lighting, landscaping, and drainage improvements. A Tentative Parcel Map is required to subdivide the property for the proposed land uses, and minor adjustments to address setback and height requirements in the Regional Commercial zone have also been requested. The Community Development Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2014-1002 for this project, in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Community Development Director has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent and mitigation measures have been incorporated. Therefore, the Community Development Director is recommending that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program be adopted. The public is invited to comment on the Mitigated Negative Declaration during the public review period beginning on November 18, 2014 and ending on December 9, 2014. Planning Commission Hearing: The La Quint# Planning Commission will consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a public meeting tentatively,sc eduled for December 9, 2014, to be held at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at ,78-495 C 11 Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253. November 6, 2014 Les 4dhd , Community Development Director Date Environmental Checklist Form Project title: Environmental Assessment 2014-635; Site Development Permit 2014-1005; Tentative Parcel Map 2014-1003, Minor Adjustments 2014-0008 and 2014-0009 Lead agency name and address Contact person and phone number City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Jay Wuu, Associate Planner 760-777-7125 Project location: 78611 Highway 111 La Quinta, California 92253 APN 643-220-007 Project sponsor's name and address: David Drake, Prest Vuksic Architects 44530 San Pablo Ave. Palm Desert, CA 92260 General Plan: General Commercial Zoning: CR (Regional Commercial) Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) The proposed project is located at the southwesterly corner of Highway 111 and Simon Drive on a site that currently includes a vacant commercial building and paved parking lot. The project proposes a total of 30,270 square feet of building area, including: 1) 3,750 square foot fast food restaurant with drive - through and 1,000 square feet of outdoor seating; 2) 17,020 square foot food market, and 3) 8,500 square foot multi -tenant retail building. The project also includes parking lots, lighting, landscaping, and drainage improvements. A Tentative Parcel Map is required to subdivide the property for the proposed land uses, and minor adjustments to address setback and height requirements in the Regional Commercial zone have also been requested. All applications are herein referred to as "the project." Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: General Commercial South: General Commercial East: General Commercial West: General Commercial Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) None. -1- ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Biological Resources Hazards & Hazardous Agriculture Resources Air Quality Cultural Resources Geology /Soils Hydrology / Water Land Use / Planning Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities / Service Quality Noise Population / Housing Recreation Transportation/Traffic Mandatory Findings of Significance Systems DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the 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 th; proposed project, nothing further is required. kkI�(ILA Date _2. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on - site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. -3- Exhibit 1: Site Plan -4- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (project materials; General Plan Exhibit II- X 4, Image Corridors) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (California Scenic Highway X Mapping System, www.dot.ca.gov, accessed October 15, 2014; aerial photography; project materials) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its X surroundings? (project materials; General Plan Exhibit II-4, Image Corridors) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or X nighttime views in the area? (project materials; La Quinta Municipal Code) I. a) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject property is located in an urbanized segment of Highway III that is dominated by regional commercial development. Immediate street -level views include single -story commercial buildings, roadways, parking lots, street lighting, landscaping, and other elements of the built environment. The upper elevations of the rocky foothills of the Santa Rosa Mountains are visible to the west and southwest (approximately '/4 to %z mile away). However, lower elevations are blocked by intervening development, and the quality of scenic vistas from the subject property is diminished. Proposed buildings and improvements are consistent with surrounding development and will have a less than significant impact on scenic vistas. b) No Impact. The subject property is currently improved with a vacant single -story commercial building, paved parking lots, and perimeter landscaping. No scenic resources, such as trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings are located onsite. Neither Highway I I I nor Simon Drive adjacent to the subject property is designated as a state scenic highway. Highway 111 is an Image Corridor as defined by the City's General Plan. The project will be required to comply with the requirements for development along this Image Corridor, including limitations on building heights. The proposed project will not damage scenic resources. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The entire subject property was disturbed and developed in 1982 with a car dealership and auto body/repair facility. The site currently contains a vacant, approximately 30,000 square -foot, single -story commercial building, paved parking lots, and 10±-foot wide perimeter landscaping on the east, south, and west. The existing L-shaped building extends along the property's entire Highway 111 and Simon Drive frontages. -5- The proposed project will result in 3 single -story commercial structures and related improvements that are consistent with the existing visual character of the site and its surroundings. The project can be expected to enhance the overall visual character over existing conditions by removing the vacant building, amassing most of the buildings toward the southern property boundary, and visually "opening up" the Highway 111 and (easterly) Simon Drive frontages. The proposed project will also widen existing perimeter landscape buffers and increase the coverage of landscape materials. Implementation of the project is expected to have a less than significant impact on the visual character of the area. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate light and glare from parking lot lighting, landscape lighting, safety and security lighting on building exteriors, and vehicles accessing the site. However, impacts will be consistent with existing light generated by surrounding commercial development and traffic on Highway 111 and Simon Drive. To assure proper shielding of light fixtures and minimize spillage onto adjacent properties, the project lighting plan will be required to comply with Sections 9.100.150 (Outdoor Lighting), 9.150.080 (Parking facility design), and other applicable sections of the Municipal Code. 0 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of X the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? (Riverside Co. Important Farmland May, 2010, CA Dept. of Conservation) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (La Quinta X Zoning Map; Riverside Co. Williamson Act Lands map, 2006, CA Dept. of Conservation) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to X non-agricultural use? (General Plan Land Use Map; project materials) II. a, b, c) No Impact. The subject property is in an urbanized area and has been developed for commercial uses for more than three decades. It is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide or Local Importance by the California Department of Conservation. The project will not conflict with zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, nor will it involve other changes that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. -7- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (2012 SCAQMD X AQMP; 2003 CV PM10 State Implementation Plan; application materials) b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (CaIEEMod Version 2013 2.2; X SCAQMD CEQA Handbook; 2012 SCAQMD AQMP; 2003 CV PM10 State Implementation Plan; application materials) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which X exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (CaIEEMod Version 2013 2.2; SCAQMD CEQA Handbook; 2012 SCAQMD AQMP; 2003 CV PM10 State Implementation Plan; application materials) d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (CaIEEMod Version 2013 2.2; SCAQMD CEQA Handbook; 2012 X SCAQMD AQMP; 2003 CV PM10 State Implementation Plan; application materials) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (application X materials) f) Generate greenhouse gas emissions either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant X impact on the environment? (CaIEEMod Version 2013 2.2; SCAQMD CEQA Handbook; 2012 SCAQMD AQMP; 2003 CV PM10 State Implementation Plan; application materials) g) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the X emissions of greenhouse gases? (CaIEEMod Version 2013 2.2; SCAQMD CEQA Handbook; 2012 SCAQMD AQMP; 2003 CV PM10 State Implementation Plan; application materials) III. a) No Impact. The Coachella Valley, including the project area, is located within the Salton Sea Air Basin (SSAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). SCAQMD is responsible for monitoring criteria air pollutant concentrations and establishing management policies for the SSAB. All development within the SSAB is subject to SCAQMD's 2012 Air Quality In Management Plan (2012 AQMP) and the 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 State Implementation Plan (2003 CV PMIo SIP). The project will be developed in accordance with all applicable air quality management plans. The AQMP is based, in part, on the land use plans of the jurisdictions in the region. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the City of La Quinta General Plan and, therefore, the project is consistent with the intent of the AQMP. No impacts associated with compliance with applicable management plans are expected. b, c) Less Than Significant Impact. Criteria air pollutants will be released during both the construction and operational phases of the proposed project. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) was used to project air quality emissions that will be generated by the project. Table 1 summarizes short-term construction -related emissions, and Table 2 summarizes ongoing emissions generated during operation. Construction Emissions The construction period includes all aspects of project development, including site preparation, grading, hauling, paving, building construction, and application of architectural coatings. It also includes demolition of the existing 30,000± square foot building and paved parking lots. For analysis purposes, it is assumed that construction will occur over a 6-month period from January 2015 to June 2015. As shown in Table 1, emissions generated by construction activities will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance for criteria air pollutants. The data reflect average daily emissions, unmitigated, over the 6-month construction period, including summer and winter weather conditions. Construction emissions include the demolition and removal of an existing 30,000 square foot building and parking lot pavement. The data are conservative because they represent unmitigated emissions. Implementation of standard reduction measures during construction will further reduce emission levels. Such measures include, but are not limited to, the implementation of dust control plans in conformance with SCAQMD Rule 403, proper maintenance and limited idling of heavy equipment, and the use of low -polluting architectural paint and coatings. Air quality impacts for criteria pollutants from construction of the proposed project, therefore, are expected to be less than significant. Table 1 La Quinta Square Maximum Daily Construction -Related Emissions Summary (hounds Der dav) CO NO, ROG SO2 PMIo PM2.5 Construction Emissions) 48.22 59.28 15.79 0.07 21.31 12.81 SCAQMD Thresholds 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Exceed? No No No No No No ' Average of winter and summer emissions, unmitigated, 2015. Source: CaIEEMod model, version 2013.2.2 output tables generated 10.3.14 -9- Operational Emissions Operational emissions are ongoing emissions that occur over the life of the project. They include area source emissions, emissions from energy consumption (electric and natural gas), and mobile source (vehicle) emissions. Table 2 provides a summary of projected emissions during operation of the proposed project. Table 2 La Quinta Square Operation -Related Emissions Summary CO NO,, ROG S02 PM10 PM2.5 Operational Emissions' 213.96 38.73 30.09 0.15 9.74 2.92 SCAQMD Thresholds 550.00 100.00 75.00 150.00 150.00 55.00 Exceed? No No No No No No Average of winter and summer emissions, unmitigated, 2015. Source: CaIEEMod model, version 2013.2.2 output tables generated 10.3.14 As shown in Table 2, operational emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance for any criteria pollutants. The data are conservative and reflect unmitigated operations; implementation of standard reduction measures will further reduce pollutant emissions. These include, but are not limited to, the use of low-VOC architectural paints and coatings and energy -efficient appliances. Non -Attainment Historically, the Coachella Valley, in which the project site is located, has been classified as a "non -attainment" area for PM10 and ozone. The proposed project will contribute to an incremental increase in regional ozone and PM10 emissions. However, given its limited size and scope, cumulative impacts are not expected to be considerable. Project construction and operation emissions will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for PM10 or ozone precursors (NOx), and appropriate standard reduction measures will be implemented that will further reduce emissions. The project will not conflict with any attainment plans and will result in less than significant impacts. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The nearest sensitive receptors are single-family residences located on Washington Street (frontage road), approximately 90 meters west of the project site. To determine if the proposed project has the potential to generate significant adverse localized air quality impacts, the mass rate Localized Significance Threshold (LST) Look -Up Table was used. The City of La Quinta and subject property are located within Source Receptor Area 30 (Coachella Valley). Given the project's size and proximity to existing housing, the 2-acre site tables at a distance of 100 meters were used. Table 3 shows on -site emission concentrations for project construction and the associated LST. As shown in the table, LST will not be exceeded under unmitigated conditions for CO, NOx and PM10. PM2.5 will not exceed LST thresholds under mitigated conditions, which includes best management practices and standard dust -10- control measures (SCAQMD Rule 403). Therefore, air quality impacts to nearby sensitive receptors will be less than significant. Table 3 La Quinta Square Localized Significance Thresholds CO NOx PM10 PM2.5* Construction 48.22 59.28 21.31 6.75 LST Threshold 3,409.00 296.00 44.00 12.00 Exceed? No No No No Emission Source: CalEEMod model, version 2013.2.2 output tables generated 10.3.14 LST Threshold Source: LST Mass Rate Look -up Table, SCAQMD. * Shows mitigated emissions for PM2.5. Mitigation measures include best management practices and standard dust control measures such as site watering during earth moving activities. These measures will also reduce PM10 emissions. e) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project includes a fast food restaurant and food market, which will generate odors from food, grease, and oils. Future operations in the multi -tenant retail building could also generate odors; however, they can be expected to be limited and consistent with general commercial uses. The proposed project is consistent with surrounding land uses, and impacts will be less than significant. f, g) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during construction and operation. Construction -related emissions will be temporary and will end once the project is built. As such, impacts to air quality resulting from the emission of greenhouse gases associated with construction activities will be less than significant. Construction -related emissions will be minimized during construction by limiting idling times of construction equipment, adequate maintenance of heavy machinery, and efficient scheduling of construction activities to minimize combustion emissions. Operation of the project will create ongoing greenhouse gases through the consumption of electricity and natural gas, moving sources, and the transport and pumping of water. Table 4 describes annual (unmitigated) operational GHG generation. Table 4 La Quinta Square GHG Emissions from Construction and Operation (Metric Tons/Year) CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Construction Activities 194.16 0.04 0.00 194.97 Operational Activities 2,419.14 1.92 0.00 2,493.21 CalEEMod model, version 2013.2.2 output tables generated 10.3.14. Values shown represent the total annual, unmitigated GHG emission projections for construction and operation of the proposed project, 2015. -11- State legislation, including AB32, aims for the reduction of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2020; however, there are currently no thresholds for greenhouse gases as they relate to small-scale commercial centers such as the proposed project. It is recognized that GHG impacts are intrinsically cumulative. As such, project construction and operation will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with applicable rules and regulations pertaining to the release and generation of GHGs. The City implements its Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan for private projects, and will apply measures from that Plan to the proposed project. Statewide programs and standards will further reduce GHG emissions generated by the project, including new fuel -efficient standards for cars and newly adopted Building Code Title 24 standards. The proposed project will have a less than significant impact on the environment from the emission of GHGs and will not conflict with any applicable GHG plans, policies, or regulations. -12- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or X regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan Chpt. III and Exhibit III-2; project materials) 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 X and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan Chpt. III and Exhibit III-3; project materials) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, X 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 X 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 X preservation policy or ordinance? (Municipal Code) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, X regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (MSHCP Figure 4-1; General Plan Chpt. III) IV. a) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject property is located within the urbanized Highway 1 I I corridor and surrounded on all sides by roads and regional commercial development. The entire 3.9±-acre site was developed as a commercial car dealership and auto body repair shop for more than 30 years. No native vegetation or habitat features are located onsite; vegetation is limited to palm trees and other plants in a 10±-foot wide landscape perimeter on the east, south, and west sides of the property. The site is located outside of habitat areas where special status species have been documented and areas where species -specific studies are required. The proposed project will result in redevelopment of the entire site, removal and/or replacement of existing landscaping materials, and the addition of new landscaping -13- materials. Given the urbanized nature of the site and its immediate surroundings, the project is not expected to result in direct or indirect impacts that would adversely impact a special status biological species. b-c) No Impact. The subject property has been fully developed for commercial purposes for more than three decades. Neither the site nor surrounding properties contains wetlands, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, blueline steams, or creeks. The project will have no impact on sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans. d) No Impact. The subject property is entirely surrounded by roadways (State Highway 111 and Simon Drive) and commercial development in an urban setting. It is not known to serve as a wildlife corridor or nursery site. Therefore, the proposed project will have no impact on the movement of wildlife species. e) No Impact. The proposed project will not conflict with any local ordinances protecting biological species and will be required to comply with the landscaping and other appropriate requirements of the Municipal Code. 0 No Impact. The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation and Natural Community Conservation Plan (MSHCP), to which the City is a participant and signatory. The project proponent will be required to pay the Local Development Mitigation Fee to mitigate any potential impacts to species protected under the Plan. The subject property is not located within a MSHCP Conservation Area, and therefore, no additional development -specific parameters will apply. -14- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? (General Plan Exhibit III-4; City -Wide Historic Resources Survey and Update, 1996-1997 and 2006, CRM Tech, revised August 23, 2012; X City of La Quinta Historic Resources Database and Inventory Map, www.la-quinta.org, accessed October 3, 2014; Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Odic Environmental, December 19, 2011). b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to'15064.5? (General Plan Exhibit III-4; Phase I X Environmental Site Assessment, Odic Environmental, December 19, 2011) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? (General Plan p. III-50 and Exhibit III-5; X Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Odic Environmental, December 19, 2011) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Phase I X Environmental Site Assessment, Odic Environmental, December 19, 2011) V.a-b) No Impact. The subject property includes a structure that was built in 1982 and served as a car dealership and auto body service and repair shop. It does not meet the 45-year old age requirement or other parameters necessary for designation as a historically significant structure. The building will be demolished as part of the proposed project. Like much of the City, the project area was previously surveyed for cultural resources. Neither the subject property nor its immediate vicinity is identified as containing historically significant buildings or resources, being within a thematic historic district, or containing archaeological resources. The property is not listed on the City's Historic Resources Inventory Database. Its surface and subsurface soils were disturbed and developed approximately 32 years ago, and it is not anticipated that archaeological resources will be found onsite or that the proposed project would adversely impact any such resources. c) No Impact. The subject property is located in an area characterized by recently deposited sand dunes in which the potential for paleontological resources is low or undetermined. Onsite soils have been heavily disturbed by development of car dealership improvements, including grading of soils, construction of a parking lot and building, and installation of 6 underground storage tanks (USTs) for storage of motor oils and fuels, which have been removed, and a septic tank which has been abandoned. The proposed project is not expected to adversely impact paleontological resources. -15- d) No Impact. As described above, onsite surface and subsurface soils have been heavily disturbed due to prior development and installation of underground storage tanks and a septic system. No cemeteries are known to occur onsite, and it is unlikely that human remains will be uncovered or disturbed as a result of the proposed project. -16- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State X Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan Exhibit IV-2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan X Exhibit IV-2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General Plan Exhibit IV-3; X Engineering Bulletin #09-03, City of La Quinta Public Works Department, June 18, 2010) iv) Landslides? (General Plan Exhibit IV-3) X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of X topsoil? (General Plan Exhibit IV-5) c) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or X property? (General Plan Exhibit IV-4; "Soil Survey of Riverside County, CA, Coachella Valley Area," US Dept. of Agriculture, 1980) d) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water X disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VI. a)i. No Impact. The subject property is not located within a currently delineated Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and no active faults are mapped in the immediate vicinity of the site. Development of the proposed project will not expose people or structures to hazards associated with fault rupture. a)ii. Less Than Significant Impact. The closest active fault to the subject property is the San Andreas Fault, approximately 6 miles northeast of the site. Historical earthquake magnitudes measured in the vicinity of the subject property range from less than 2.0 to 4.0. The property could experience moderate to severe ground shaking from earthquakes originating on this and other local and regional faults. Earthquake - resistant construction methods prescribed by the Building Code will be implemented to minimize potential structural damage. At a minimum, seismic design will be required to comply with the most recent version of the California Building Code (CBC). -17- a)iii. No Impact. Due to its soil composition and depth to groundwater, the project site and it vicinity are not subject to liquefaction. The site is also outside of areas identified as having the potential for subsidence, seismically -induced settlement, and collapsible soils. a)iv. No Impact. The subject property is approximately 0.3 miles east of the nearest slopes of the Santa Rosa Mountains. It is not susceptible to slope instability, including landslides, rock falls, or soil slumps. The proposed project will not expose people or structures to hazards associated with slope instability. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the proposed project is not expected to result in significant soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Nearly all of the subject property was cleared, graded, and developed more than 30 years ago, and it currently contains a 30,000± square foot building and paved parking lot. Onsite soils are limited to a landscape perimeter approximately 10 feet wide along the north, east, and south sides of the property. Nonetheless, the property is located in an area with a high to very high wind erodibility rating, and some erosion could occur during project construction. A dust management plan will be part of the standard requirements imposed through conditions of approval to minimize fugitive dust generated during the building process. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject property is generally underlain by wind - laid dune sand (Qs) and alluvial sand and clay of valley areas (Ql/Qa), which have a low shrink/swell potential. The proposed project will not create substantial safety risks associated with expansive soils. d) No Impact. The proposed project will connect to existing sewer lines, and no alternative waste water disposal systems are proposed or required. -18- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIL HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ("Phase I Environmental Site Assessment," Odic X Environmental, December 19, 2011; "Phase II Environmental Site Assessment," Odic Environmental, March 29, 2012) 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? ("Phase X I Environmental Site Assessment," Odic Environmental, December 19, 2011; "Phase II Environmental Site Assessment," Odic Environmental, March 29, 2012) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (General Plan; "Phase I X Environmental Site Assessment," Odic Environmental, December 19, 2011; "Phase II Environmental Site Assessment," Odic Environmental, March 29, 2012) 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? (Envirostor database, CA Dept. X of Toxic Substances Control, accessed October 6, 2014; "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment," Odic Environmental, December 19, 2011; "Phase II Environmental Site Assessment," Odic Environmental, March 29, 2012) 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 X for people residing or working in the project area? ("Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan," Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission, October 14, 2004) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard X for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or X emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan) h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to X urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? ("Fire Hazard Severity Zones" -19- maps, CA Dept. of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2007, 2010) VII. a-b) Less Than Significant Impact. Proposed Project The project proposes a fast-food restaurant, grocery market, and multi -tenant retail building. Onsite materials will be limited to those associated with general retail and food sales, as well as routine facility and landscape maintenance. The project will result in the transport and storage of limited quantities of potentially hazardous or flammable products, such as cooking fuels and oils, and cleaning products. Disposal of grease, oils, and other wastes from the fast-food restaurant and food market will be required to comply with applicable regulations of the City, Riverside County Department of Environmental Health, and California Regional Water Quality Control Board. There is no foreseeable risk of release of hazardous chemicals into the environment that would pose a significant threat to the public. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment An onsite Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was performed in 2011 to evaluate the historic and existing conditions of vacated onsite improvements that formerly served as a car dealership and full service auto repair facility. In addition to a commercial building, improvements include 8 in -ground hydraulic vehicle lifts, 3 sand/grease interceptors, a 240-gallon waste antifreeze double -walled aboveground storage tank, and a free-standing car wash. In 1993, a small dispensing line leak was found in one of the property's underground storage tanks (USTs). In 1994, 6 USTs containing gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, waste oil, antifreeze, and automatic transmission fluid were removed from the site. In 1998, a 3,500 gallon septic tank and seepage pits were abandoned. The State's Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) database identifies the property's status as "Completed — Case Closed." The California Regional Water Quality Control Board's online property database indicates that 75 cubic yards of petroleum -impacted soil were excavated in 1997, and case closure was granted in 2001. Phase II Environmental Site Assessment A Phase II Environmental Site Assessment was prepared in 2012 to determine whether the onsite subsurface environment was impacted by contaminants from the former auto facility. No environmental impacts of regulatory concern were detected, and no further actions were recommended. Development of the proposed project is not expected to be adversely impacted by existing surface or subsurface conditions. c) No Impact. No schools are located within 1/a-mile radius of the subject property, and no handling of hazardous materials or waste is anticipated that could pose a risk to an existing or proposed school. d) No Impact. The project site is not located on or near a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, therefore, the proposed project will not create a significant hazard to the public or environment. -20- e-f) No Impact. The project site is located approximately 2.5 miles southwest of the Bermuda Dunes Airport and 9.5 miles northwest of the Jacqueline Cochran Regional Airport. It is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public or private airport, and therefore, will not result in an aviation safety hazard for people working or residing in the area. g) No Impact. The proposed project will not physically interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans. Access to/from the site will be provided at 3 points on the existing street grid (Highway 111 and Simon Drive). The project will be required to comply with police and fire department regulations to assure adequate emergency access and vehicle turn -around space. h) No Impact. The subject property and immediate project vicinity are within the developed Highway 111 commercial corridor and approximately 0.25 miles from the nearest wildlands (Santa Rosa Mountains). According to CalFire fire hazard mapping, the subject property is not located within a fire hazard severity zone. The proposed project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk associated with wildfire hazards. -21- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ("Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for La Quinta Square," X Kimley-Horn and Assoc., July 2014;"Preliminary Drainage Study, La Quinta Square," Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Aug. 8, 2014 ) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not X support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? (application materials, "Coachella Valley Water Management Plan Update Final Report," Coachella Valley Water District, January 2012.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? ("Preliminary Water Quality Management X Plan for La Quinta Square," Kimley-Horn and Assoc., July 2014;"Preliminary Drainage Study, La Quinta Square," Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Aug. 8, 2014 ) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- X site? ("Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for La Quinta Square," Kimley-Horn and Assoc., July 2014;"Preliminary Drainage Study, La Quinta Square," Kimley-Horn and Assoc., Aug. 8, 2014 } e) 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? ("Preliminary X Water Quality Management Plan for La Quinta Square," Kimley-Horn and Assoc., July 2014;"Preliminary Drainage Study, La Quinta Square," Kimley-Hom and Assoc., Aug. 8, 2014 ) f) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard X delineation map? (General Plan Exhibit IV-6) g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood X flows? (General Plan Exhibit IV-6) -22- VIII. a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Buildings will be connected to the existing sewer system operated by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). CVWD implements all the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) as they relate to wastewater discharge requirements and water quality standards. The fast-food restaurant and any food service areas within the grocery market will provide sanitary sewer connections for disposal of wash water. Disposal of grease and oil will comply with Riverside County Department of Environmental Health and RWQCB regulations. As described in the project's Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, the project will implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address the management of pollutants of concern that may be generated onsite. Proposed BMPs include the use of perimeter landscaping, curb inlet filters, vegetated swales, and infiltration wells to collect runoff, facilitate filtration and retention, and slow the flow of onsite runoff. A routine BMP maintenance program will be established to assure ongoing implementation. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Domestic water will be supplied to the subject property by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) through existing water infrastructure. CVWD has prepared a Water Management Plan Update (2012) to help evaluate and plan for current and future water demand and supply in its service area. The Plan demonstrates that CVWD has available, or can supply in the future, sufficient and reliable water supplies to serve future development in the project area. Water will be consumed by the proposed project during both the construction and operational phases. In the short-term, onsite water will be required during site grading as part of the dust mitigation program. Over the long-term, water consumption will be that required by a standard fast-food restaurant, grocery market, and regional retail tenants. The project will be required to use drought -tolerant planting materials and limited irrigation water for landscaping. Onsite buildings will be equipped with water efficient fixtures in compliance with Building Code requirements to minimize water consumption. The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. c-e) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject property does not contain any streams, rivers, or other water features. It is developed with one commercial building and paved parking lots. Other than a 10±-foot wide landscaping perimeter along the northerly, easterly, and southerly property boundaries, the site is completely impervious. Existing runoff sheet flows onto Highway 111 and Simon Drive, where it is captured by existing curb and gutter improvements. The proposed project will not significantly change drainage patterns onsite or in the surrounding area, and is expected to decrease runoff volumes generated onsite. Under the proposed project, storm water runoff will surface flow to parking lot curb inlets located along the northerly, easterly, and southerly property boundaries. Runoff will discharge into landscaped areas and into 3 drywells where it will be filtered to remove debris and pollutants. The 100-year overflow will drain onto Highway 111 and Simon Drive to existing inlets near Washington Street. Compared to current conditions, the -23- proposed project represents an increase in onsite landscaping and a decrease in impervious surfaces, which is expected to reduce site -generated runoff under both 10- year and 100-year conditions. f, g) No Impact. The subject property is not located within a designated flood zone. The proposed project will not place housing or other structures in a flood zone. -24- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? X (aerial photographs; project site plan) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for X the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (application materials; General Plan Exhibit II-1; La Quinta Zoning Map) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community X conservation plan? (Coachella Valley Multi - Species Habitat Conservation Plan) IX. a) No Impact. The proposed project will not physically divide an established community. The site is located within the Highway 111 commercial corridor and is surrounded on all sides by roads and commercial development. It was previously used for commercial purposes and will continue to be under the proposed plan. b) No Impact. The subject property is designated for "General Commercial" purposes in the General Plan and "Regional Commercial" in the Zoning Ordinances. Proposed land uses are consistent with these designations. The project will not conflict with any plans, policies, or regulations with jurisdiction over the project. c) No Impact. The City has adopted the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), and the subject property is located within the boundaries of the Plan. As such, the project proponent will be required to pay the Local Development Mitigation Fee (LDMF) as mitigation for any potential impacts to sensitive biological species covered by the Plan. Fee payment will assure the project is consistent with MSHCP requirements. -25- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the X region and the residents of the state? (General Plan Exhibits II-1 and III-1) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally - important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan X or other land use plan? (General Plan Exhibits II- 1 and III-1) X. a, b) No Impact. The proposed project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally or regionally important mineral resource. The California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology has mapped the City's mineral resources and designated the project site as "MRZ-1," which represents areas where adequate geologic information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood for their presence exists. The City General Plan designates the subject property and surrounding properties for "General Commercial" land uses. -26- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or X applicable standards of other agencies? (Zoning Ordinance Sections 9.100.210 and 6.08.050; project materials) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne X noise levels? (Zoning Ordinance Sections 9.100.210 and 6.08.050; project materials) c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Zoning Ordinance X Sections 9.100.210 and 6.08.050; project materials) d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (Zoning X Ordinance Sections 9.100.210 and 6.08.050; project materials) 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 expose people residing X or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ("Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan," Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission, October 14, 2004) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise X levels? ("Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan," Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission, October 14, 2004) XI. a-d) Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the proposed project will require demolition of an existing approximately 30,000 square foot building and paved parking surfaces covering nearly all of the remainder of the site. Demolition and materials removal will require the use of heavy construction equipment such as excavators, bulldozers, jack hammers, and hauling trucks, which can generate high noise levels and groundborne vibrations. Redevelopment of the site will require the use of grading, construction, and paving equipment. Construction Noise While demolition and construction noise impacts could be substantial at times, they will be temporary and will cease once the project is complete. Surrounding land uses are limited to roadways (Highway 111 and Simon Drive) and commercial -27- development, which are not highly sensitive to noise. The nearest sensitive receptors are residences approximately 90 meters west of the site on Washington Street. Construction noise is exempt from the noise standards set forth in Section 9.100.210 of the Zoning Ordinance; however, it is restricted to certain days of the week and times of day (Section 6.08.050). Adherence to these limitations will minimize construction -related impacts to less than significant levels. Operational Noise During the long-term operational phase, groundborne vibration will be non-existent or undetectable, and noise levels will be comparable to similar general commercial development in the project area. Principal noise sources will be vehicles accessing the site for shopping and deliveries. Limited noise may be emitted by onsite mechanical equipment, such as heating, air conditioning, and ventilation systems. Given the proximity of the site to Highway I I I traffic and commercial development on adjacent properties, the project will not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels over existing conditions. It will be required to comply with the noise levels established in the Zoning Ordinance. e, f) No Impact. The subject property is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public airport or private airstrip. The project will not expose people working or residing in the project area to excessive noise levels. -28- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for X example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (application materials) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of X replacement housing elsewhere? (application materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement X housing elsewhere? (application materials) XII. a) No Impact. The proposed project will not directly or indirectly induce substantial population growth. It consists of a general retail project that is relatively limited in size (29,270 square feet on 3.9± acres). It will occur on a site that was formerly used for commercial purposes and is already served by existing roadways, public utilities, and other infrastructure. b, c) No Impact. The subject property contains a vacant commercial structure and parking lot. The project will not result in the displacement of any people or existing housing, or necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. -29- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan, application X materials) Police protection? (General Plan, application X materials) Schools? (General Plan, application materials) X Parks? (General Plan, application materials) X Other public facilities? (General Plan, application X materials) XIII. a) Less Than Significant Impact. Fire and Police Protection The proposed project will result in less than significant impacts to fire and police protection services. The subject property is located on the Highway 111 commercial corridor and easily accessed by the Riverside County Fire and Sheriff's Departments, which provide fire and police services for the City. The nearest fire station is located at 44555 Adams Street, approximately 1 mile northeast of the project site. The City's Civic Center Community Policing Office is located at 78495 Calle Tampico, approximately 2.5 miles south of the project site. The property is accessible from the existing roadway network. Project plans will be required to provide adequate emergency access and vehicle turnaround space and comply with other fire and police requirements, such as installation of sprinkler systems. The project will be required to pay development impact fees for fire protection services. Schools, Parks, and other Public Facilities The proposed project is a commercial project that is not expected to substantially induce population growth. As such, it is not expected to directly impact area schools or parks. Nonetheless, the project proponent will be required to pay development impact fees to mitigate potential impacts to schools and other public facilities, including the Civic Center. -30- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial X physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (project materials) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an X adverse physical effect on the environment? (project materials) XIV. a, b) No Impact. The proposed project is a retail commercial development that is not expected to substantially induce population growth. No impacts to neighborhood or regional parks and recreation facilities are anticipated. The project does not propose and will not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. -31- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the X volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? ("La Quinta Square Traffic Impact Analysis," Kimley-Horn, August 2014) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for X designated roads or highways? ("La Quinta Square Traffic Impact Analysis," Kimley-Horn, August 2014) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial X safety risks? (application materials, aerial photography) d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm X equipment)? ("La Quinta Square Traffic Impact Analysis," Kimley-Horn, August 2014; application materials) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X (application materials) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (application materials; "La Quinta Square Traffic X Impact Analysis," Kimley-Horn, August 2014; Zoning Code) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation X (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (application materials; General Plan; www.sunline.org) XV. a-b) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The subject property is located immediately west of the intersection of Highway 111 and Simon Drive. Primary access to the site will be provided by a right-in/right-out driveway along Highway 111. Secondary access will be provided by two full access driveways along Simon Drive, one east of the site and one south of the site. Traffic Impact Analysis and Significance Thresholds A project -specific traffic impact analysis was prepared to evaluate existing conditions in the project area and future conditions associated with build out of the proposed project. The analysis evaluated 11 key intersections and 12 roadway segments in the project vicinity. The City of La Quinta requires that signalized intersections operate at -32- Level -of -Service (LOS) D or better. However, at intersections along roadways identified in the Riverside County Congestion Management Plan (CMP) System of Highways and Roadways, the minimum required level —of -service is LOS E. Within La Quinta, Highway 111 is designated as a CMP facility. The City also requires that the volume -to -capacity (V/C) ratio not exceed 0.90 (LOS D) for roadway segments. Existing Conditions (2013) Under existing (2013) conditions, all of the studied intersections operate at LOS D or better, and all of the roadway segments operate at LOS A and B, which have V/C ratios of less than 0.90. Proposed Project The proposed project is estimated to generate 4,832 total new daily trips, with 93 new trips occurring during the AM peak hour, 343 new trips occurring during the mid -day peak hour, and 414 new trips occurring during the PM peak hour. Background Growth (2015) Without the Project The proposed project is expected to be operational by year 2015. Projections of 2015 traffic conditions without the project indicate that all evaluated intersections will continue to operate at LOS D or better, and all roadway segments will continue to operate at LOS A or B. Background Growth (2015) Plus Project Peak hour traffic conditions for 2015 were added to projected traffic conditions generated by the proposed project. With the addition of the project, the studied intersections will continue to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Study area roadway segments will continue to operate at LOS A or B. Cumulative Conditions (2035) Without the Project The intersections and roadway segments in the project area were also evaluated under year 2035 conditions, consistent with General Plan buildout. In year 2035, 4 studied intersections will operate at LOS F conditions during at least one peak hour. One (1) studied roadway segment will operate at LOS E, and 1 segment will operate at LOS F. The intersections and roadway segment are listed below. Intersections: • Highway 111 at Depot Drive (LOS F) • Highway 111 at Jefferson Street (LOS F) • Washington Street at Fred Waring Drive (LOS F) • Washington Street at Miles Avenue (LOS F) Roadway Segments: • Highway 111, from La Quinta Center Drive to Adams Street (V/C ratio 0.913)(LOS E) • Washington Street, from Fred Waring Drive to Miles Avenue (V/C ratio = 1.051)(LOS F) Cumulative Conditions (2035) Plus Project When the proposed project is added to 2035 traffic conditions, the four studied intersections operating at LOS F without the project would have increased delays, but no additional intersections would degrade to substandard LOS. A third roadway -33- segment will operate at LOS E, as identified below. Intersections and roadway segments operating at less than acceptable levels include: Intersections: • Highway I I I at Depot Drive (LOS F) • Highway I I I at Jefferson Street (LOS F) • Washington Street at Fred Waring Drive (LOS F) • Washington Street at Miles Avenue (LOS F) Roadway Segments: • Highway 111, from La Quinta Center Drive to Adams Street (V/C ratio 0.949)(LOS E) • Washington Street, from Fred Waring Drive to Miles Avenue (V/C ratio = 1.067)(LOS F) • Washington Street, from Miles Avenue to Highway 111 (V/C ratio = 0.914)(LOS E) Project Impacts The proposed project will not significantly impact traffic in the project vicinity at buildout (year 2015). However, over the long-term (year 2035), it will contribute to decreases in levels -of -service at several area intersections and roadway segments. Mitigation Measures XV (a) and XV (b): The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce project impacts to less than significant levels: MM1: Intersection of Highway 111 and Simon Drive The project shall contribute its fair share of costs associated with restriping the northbound and southbound approaches to include a separate left -turn lane and a shared through right lane in each direction, as well as signal modification to provide separate northbound and southbound left -turn signal phases. MM2: Intersection of Washington Street and Miles Avenue The project shall contribute its fair share of costs associated with adding a dedicated westbound right -turn lane and converting the existing westbound shared through right lane to a through only lane, as well as adding a westbound right -turn overlap phase. Monitoring XV (a) and XV (b): A. Prior to issuance of grading permits and authorization to proceed, the City Engineer shall assure that fair share costs for the projects listed above are paid by the applicant. Responsible Parties: City Engineer or staff designee c) No Impact. The subject property is located more than 2 miles from the nearest airport, and the project does not propose any facilities or activities that will affect air traffic patterns or levels. -34- d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not result in any sharp curves or vehicle incompatibilities. The vehicle mix accessing the site will be consistent with background traffic accessing other commercial development in the area. Three access driveways are proposed onsite. According to the traffic impact analysis, the proposed right -turn auxiliary deceleration lane proposed at the Highway III access drive is slightly shorter in length than the required distance due to adjacent physical constraints. However, the existing traffic shoulder provides enough room for turning vehicles to decelerate and transition into through traffic. The traffic impact analysis found that all access points will operate at acceptable conditions during all build out scenarios. e) No Impact. Emergency vehicles will use the existing roadway network and three access driveways along Highway 111 and Simon Drive to access the subject property. Project plans will be subject to Fire Department review and approval to assure that adequate fire lanes and vehicle turnaround space is provided. 0 No Impact. Parking layouts and drive aisles are aligned to provide adequate internal circulation. For Retail Commercial (general retail uses under 50,000 sq. ft.) land uses, the Zoning Code requires 1 parking space per 200 square feet GFA, and therefore, the proposed project will require 152 spaces. The site plan provides 155 parking spaces, plus distance for stacking approximately 21 vehicles in the fast food drive -through lane. g) No Impact. Highway 111 is designated in the General Plan as a Class II bicycle path (on road bicycle lane); however, no marked bike lanes currently exist adjacent to the project site. The project will not impact bike facilities, plans, or policies. Highway 111 is also part of Sunline Transit Agency's Line 111 bus route that runs along Highway 111 from Palm Springs to Indio. The nearest bus turnout is located on the north side of Highway 111, west of Simon Drive, across the street from the proposed property. The project will not interfere with bus operations or policies. -35- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? ("Preliminary Water Quality Management X Plan for La Quinta Square," Kimley-Horn and Assoc., July 2014; application materials) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental X effects? ("Coachella Valley Water Management Plan Update, Final Report," CVWD, January 2012; application materials) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? X ("Preliminary Drainage Study for La Quinta Square," Kimley-Horn and Assoc., August 8, 2014) d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? ("Coachella Valley Water Management X Plan Update, Final Report," CVWD, January 2012; application materials) e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the X provider's existing commitments? ("Coachella Valley Water Management Plan Update, Final Report," CVWD, January 2012; application materials) f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's X solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan; application materials) g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (General X Plan; application materials) XVI. a) No Impact. Wastewater discharge requirements for the Coachella Valley, including the subject property, are administered by the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board (WQCB). The project will connect to existing sewer lines in the project area, and wastewater will be transported to and processed by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) at its Water Reclamation Plant 4 (WRP-4) in Thermal. CVWD implements all the requirements of the WQCB as they relate to wastewater -36- discharge and water quality. No additional WQCB permits or approvals are required for the project. Although the project will increase wastewater flows to the CVWD treatment plant it will not adversely impact water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. b-e) Less Than Significant Impact. Water and Wastewater The proposed project will require water and generate wastewater consistent with a food market, fast food restaurant, and retail building. Given the comparatively small scale of the project (30,270± square feet of building area on 3.9 acres), project -related impacts to water and wastewater supplies and services will be less than significant. The subject property falls within the jurisdiction of the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) for domestic water and wastewater treatment services. CVWD's Water Management Plan 2010 Update (2012) demonstrates that the District has available, or can supply in the future, sufficient water to serve additional development in its service area. The water management plan includes a combination of continued groundwater extraction, conservation programs, additional water sources and source substitution, and groundwater recharge opportunities. The project will not require new or expanded water entitlements. The average annual flow to WRP-4 is approximately 4.75 million gallons per day (mgd), but it has a capacity of 9.9 mgd. Therefore, the plant has more than sufficient capacity to serve additional development, including the proposed project. Stormwater Drainage CVWD is also responsible for regional stormwater management. The drainage plan for the proposed project involves allowing stormwater runoff to surface flow across the site to curb inlets that discharge into landscaped areas along the Highway 111 and Simon Drive property frontages. Runoff will flow to 3 drywells to be infiltrated onsite, then be conveyed along Highway 111 and Simon Drive into existing stormwater inlets near Washington Street. The project decreases the percentage of impervious surfaces than currently exists onsite, and will result in corresponding reductions in discharged runoff. The project will not require the construction or expansion of stormwater management facilities. f, g) Less Than Significant Impact (f) and No Impact (g). Solid waste generated by the proposed project will include that typical of a food market, fast food restaurant, and general retail establishments, such as food waste, product packaging, and office papers and supplies. Construction waste, such as wood and concrete, will be generated during the demolition and construction processes. Much of the waste may be recyclable. Burrtec will provide solid waste collection and disposal services to the proposed project. Solid waste will be hauled to the Edom Hill Transfer Station in Cathedral City, then to one of three regional landfills (Lamb Canyon, Badlands, or El Sobrante), each of which have sufficient long-term capacity to accommodate waste generated by the proposed project. Burrtec is required to meet all local, regional, state, and federal standards for solid waste disposal, and the project will have no impact on its ability to do so. -37- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a X plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage X of long-term environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when X viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial X adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? a) Less Than Significant Impact. As described in Section IV (Biological Resources) of this Initial Study, project -related impacts to biological resources will be less than significant. The entire property was graded and developed more than 30 years ago and, until recently, operated as a car dealership and auto repair facility. The property is entirely surrounded by urban development, including roads and commercial development, and is approximately '/4 mile from the nearest open space in the Santa Rosa Mountains. Onsite vegetation is limited to urban landscaping materials on a narrow landscape perimeter, and no special status species or communities are known to occur onsite. Potential impacts to sensitive biological species will be mitigated through the payment of the Local Development Mitigation Fee. The proposed project will have no impact on archaeological, historical, or paleontological resources. Existing onsite buildings are not historically significant. The likelihood of the site containing significant artifacts is considered very low given -38- the extent to which the site was previously graded, and the previous construction and removal of underground storage tanks and septic system. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project constitutes the redevelopment of a commercial parcel that contains a vacated building. It is consistent with surrounding development and existing land use designations and policies. The property is accessed by the existing roadway network and already served by public utilities and infrastructure. It will contribute to improved stormwater absorption and remove the nuisances associated with a vacant building. Short-term and long-term environmental impacts are not expected to be significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will result in incremental environmental impacts typically associated with a commercial development, such as increased emission of criteria pollutants during demolition and grading, and increased demand for water and wastewater services. However, the project is limited in size (30,270± square feet, 3.9 acres), and impacts are expected to be less than significant when considered in conjunction with the effects of other projects. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will not cause substantial adverse impacts, either directly or indirectly, on human beings. The property is not subject to environmental hazards, such as rockfalls or flooding, and no hazardous land uses, structures, or activities are proposed. -39- XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. No other earlier analyses were used. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. None. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. None. -40-