Loading...
CC Resolution 1996-071RESOLUTION 96-71 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-325 PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 96-027 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 96-028 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-325 HOME DEPOT, USA, INC. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 17th day of September, 1996, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 96-325, prepared for Specific Plan 96-027 and Conditional Use Permit 96-028; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 23rd day of July and the 13th day of August, 1996, hold duly noticed Public Hearings to consider Environmental Assessment 96-325, prepared for Specific Plan 96-027 and Conditional Use Permit 96-028; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing held on the 13th of August, 1996, the Planning Commission did recommend certification of Environmental Assessment 96- 325; and, WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 96-325); and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that by incorporating conditions as specified in the mitigation monitoring plan, the said Specific Plan will not have any significant adverse effects, or that any such effects have been mitigated to the extent feasible, under development policies adopted for the La Quinta General Plan and in accordance with the General Plan EIR as certified, to a level of insignificance on the environment, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the -- following facts, findings, and reasons to justify certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed Specific Plan and Conditional Use Permit will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either directly or earesoMxc Resolution No. 96-71 Page 2 indirectly, in that no significant impacts have been identified which cannot be mitigated to the extent feasible, recognizing the overriding considerations made to allow implementation and development pursuant to the La Quinta General Plan in accordance with its adopted objectives and policies. 2. The proposed Specific Plan and Conditional Use Permit does 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, due to the lack of any such factors existing on the shopping center site. 3. The proposed Specific Plan and Conditional Use Permit does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, in that development of the project will provide more efficient and safe area circulation patterns and achieve land use development as set forth in the General Plan, without significantly impacting public service and utility provisions or substantially degrading the physical environment, provided that mitigation measures are imposed on the project. 4. The proposed Specific Plan and Conditional Use Permit will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as the General Plan EIR considered these impacts, adopted mitigating measures and identified impacts which could not be fully mitigated through a Statement of Overriding Considerations. 5. The proposed Specific Plan and Conditional Use Permit will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, in that the proposed development is consistent with the designated land use and policy guidance adopted for the La Quinta General Plan, for which mitigation measures were adopted to assure that future development in accordance with said Plan would not have detrimental effects on the environment beyond those identified in the Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted for the La Quinta General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct, and constitute the findings of the City Council for this Environmental Assessment. enresn325.cc Resolution No. 96-71 Page 3 2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 96-325 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, staff report and as stated at the Public Hearing, and on file in the Community Development Department. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council held on this 17th day of September, 1996, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Holt NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None GLENDA L. HOLT, Mayor City of La Quinta, California AT ST: AUNDRA L. JU OLA, City Clerk City of La Quinta, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: iw �� l _ • l M pLnw DAWN C. HONEYWELL, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Environmental Assessment No. 96-325 Case No.: SP 96-027 CUP 96-028 L Name of Proponent: Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. Date: July 11,1996 Address: 601 S. Placentia, Fullerton, CA 92631 Phone: 714-738-5200 (Greg George, Rep.) Agency Requiring Checklist: City of La Quinta Project Name (if applicable): Specific Plan 96-027 and Conditional Use Permit 96-028, construction of an approximately 130,000 square foot retail home improvement center, specified as part of an overall proposed 218,000 square foot retail development, at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Jefferson Street. CITY OF LA QUINTA Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 cklst.325 II. 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 "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning X Transportation/Circulation Public Services Population and Housing Biological Resources Utilities X Earth Resources Energy and Mineral Resources X Aesthetics Water Risk of Upset and Human Health r, Cultural Resources X Air Quality Noise Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance M. DETERMINATION. 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL RVIPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least, 1) one effect 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, if the effect is a `potentially significant impact" or `potentially significant unless mitigated". An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. Signature rj✓ff . /i/,,�C Date hijy 11. 1996 Printed Name and Title Wallace Nesbit Associate Planner X ratrtip* SWhIMm Impam 3.1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (source #(s): b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? 3.2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? 3.3. EARTH AND GEOLOGY. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? b) Seismic ground shaking c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? e) Landslides or mudflows? f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? P�Liauy sipuk"t Ltm'n= U.1M sye rf l Milisd.d IMP— X X X X 91 Na Imryet 'X X X X 11 g) Subsidence of the land? X M T- — I ratmti0 N ati.uy Sinifimt Iw. Tb. Siaaifinm UN Sia¢ifi., N. Impact Mitigated Impact Impact h) Expansive soils? X t) Unique geologic or physical features? X 3.4. WATER. Would the project result in: a) Changes in absorption razes, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface ninoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? } c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? X f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? X g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? X h) hWacts to groundwater quality? X 3.5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any air quality standard, or contribute to any existing or projected air quality violation? X b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? vX c) Alter air movement, moisture or temperature, or cause any change in climate? X d) Create objectionable odors? X iv 3.6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? d) Insufficient parking capacity on site or off site? e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? 3.7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? c) Locally designated natural communities, (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? v P�tdy pawti,ay swffgp I. Th. s4aifaaat Uaku swaifcat Impact Midgnad Impact x Q No Impact X d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 3.8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? 3.9. RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH PotatiWy Paeatia y Siaaifiwvt I.ta Tbat Signifinal unim sipiftctal No Impact Mitigated Impaa Imp¢I X X X X Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? X d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? X e) Increased fire hazard in areas with Flammable brush, grass, or trees? X 3.10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? X b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 3.11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? X Vi pmatiay P wtidly sipifimt L. Thm sipifimt VNnt Stplinet W Imp- Mutated Imp- Imget b) Police protection? c) Schools? X d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X e) Other governmental services? X 3.12. UTIIdTIES. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alternations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? b) Communications systems? c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? e) Storm water drainage? 8 Solid waste disposal? 3.13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? c) Create light or glare? 3.14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological resources? c) Affect historical resources? d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? vii Pa LMY va.m:ur s�e�t t.w n� Ti�ifiwut U�Im 5iani.5ant no Impact Mitigated Impart Impart 3.15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? X b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? { 4. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the Potential to degrade the quality of the environmental, 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 conmumity, 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? X b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? X c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" [Weans 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). X d) Does the project have environmental effect., which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X 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. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated," 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. INITIAL STUDY - ADDENDUM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-325 Prepared for: JEFFERSON PLAZA SPECIFIC PLAN #96-027 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #96-028 HOME DEPOT, USA INC. CITY OF LA QUINTA Prepared by: Community Development Department City of La Quinta 78-495 Cane Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 July 11,1996 Amended August 8, 1996 and Seplember 6, 1996 EA96325 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section I F% 3 4 5 EA%325 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Overview 1.2 Purpose of initial Study 1.3 Background of Environmental Review 1.4 Summary of Preliminary Environmental Review PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting 2.2 Physical Characteristics 2.3 Operational Characteristics 2.4 Objectives 2.5 Discretionary Actions 2.6 Related Projects ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 3.1 Land Use and Planning 3.2 Population and Housing 3.3 Earth Resources 3.4 Water 3.5 Air Quality 3.6 Transportation/Circulation 3.7 Biological Resources 3.8 Energy and Mmeral Resources 3.9 Risk of Upset/Human Health 3.10 Noise 3.11 Public Services 3.12 Utilities 3.13 Aesthetics 3.14 Cultural Resources 3:15 Recreation MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE EARLIER ANALYSIS Page 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 bM 5 6 6 7 8 10 11 12 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 2 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW The City of La Quinta is the Lead Agency for project review, as defined by Section 21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Lead Agency is the public agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which may have a significant effect upon the environment. The City of La Quinta, as the Lead Agency, has the authority to oversee the environmental review and to make a decision on the proposal. 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY As part of the environmental review for the proposed project, the City of La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared this Initial Study. This document provides a basis for determining the nature and scope of the subsequent environmental review for the amendment. The purposes of the Initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, include the following: To provide the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) or a negative declaration for a project; To enable the applicant or the City of La Quinta to modify the project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a mitigated negative declaration of environmental impact; To assist in the preparation of an EM, should one be required, by focusing the analysis on those issues that will be adversely impacted by the proposed project; To facilitate environmental review early in the design of the project; To provide documentation for the findings in a negative declaration that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment; To eliminate unnecessary EIR's; and To determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. 1.3 BACKGROUND OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed Home Depot project was deemed subject to the environmental review requirements of CEQA in light of the potential project impacts. The Environmental Officer for the Community Development Department prepared this Initial Study and addendum for review and certification by the Planning Commission and City Council for the City of La Quinta. EA96325 1.4 SUMMARY OF PRELIl4IINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT This Initial Study checklist indicates certain potential for significant environmental impacts. As a result, specific mitigation measures have been incorporated, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact will be recommended for this project. Mitigation measures nraoosed for each issue area are underlined within the discussion. and are c ummadwd in the Mitigation Monitoring Prrwram attached to this addendum Any changes made by the applicant to the project as a result of this assessment, design review or other reason, which would necessitate changes to this addendum, are shown in italics as part of the issue area which any such changes may affect. The Home Depot project was reviewed by the La Quinta Planning Commission on July 23 and August 13, 1996. At the public hearings, significant testimorry was heard relative to design of the project, circulation and traffic impacts. The project was referred back to staff after the July 23 hearing in order to work with the applicant on those issues identified As a result ofchanges agreed to or made by the applicant for the project, the Home Depot was recommended for approval on August 13, 1996. N 2: PROJECT DE 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The City of La Quints is a 31.18 square mile municipality located in the southwestern portion of the Coachella Valley. The City is bounded on the west by the City of Indian Wells, on the east by the City of Indio and Riverside County, on the north by Riverside County, and federal and county lands to the south. The City of La Quinta was incorporated in May, 1982. The subject site consists of approximately 22 acres, at the comer of Jefferson Street and Highway 111. The site is current vacant, but was previously approved for a 251,000 square foot retail development project in 1993 (Plot Plan 92-490). The site is relatively flat, with minimal vegetation due to previous rough grading having occurred. A traffic study and cultural resources survey have been submitted with the proposed project. 2.2 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS The proposal involves a two-phase development of retail uses, consisting of a total of 218,000 square feet. The Home Depot will be developed as the first phase of the project in the northeasterly portion of the site, consisting of 129,800 square feet (approx..), which includes a 24,000 square foot outdoor garden center. A 1,500 square foot gas station site is also part of Phase 1. 2.3 OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS A specific plan document has been prepared for this project; the Home Depot will comprise almost 130,000 square feet, or approximately 60°/a of the total proposed floor area No specific information is available regarding the uses proposed under Phase 2 of the project, but conceptual plans submitted indicate three retail shell buildings and two restaurant pads, one of which is a drive through design. EA96325 2.4 OBJECTIVES The objective of this project is to develop a commercial center oriented around a big box home improvement based retailer, and maintain a flexible land use concept layout for potential future tenants, dependant upon market demand for retailers. 2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS A discretionary action is an action taken by a government agency (for this project, the government agency is the City of La Quinta) that calls for the exercise of judgment in deciding whether to approve a project. The proposed Home Depot project will require discretionary approval from the Planning Commission and City Council for the following: • Certification of the Environmental Assessment for the project; • Approval of the Specific Plan and Use Permit applications; • Approval of Site Development Permit(s) for the Phase 2 uses. 2.6 RELATED PROJECTS There are no related projects to this proposal under review at present. A previous application for a retail center, also called Jefferson Square (Specific Plan 92-022; Plot Plan 92-490), was approved by the City Council on February 2,1993 with a total of 251,000 square feet proposed for development of an off -price retail outlet center. This project received two one-year time extensions, but the approval lapsed on February 2, 1996. Previous environmental documentation consists of a Negative Declaration adopted for the project (EA 92-241). ECI'ION 3: E This section analyzes potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. CEQA issue areas are evaluated in this addendum as contained in the Initial Study Checklist. Under each checklist itern, the environmental setting is discussed, including a description of conditions as the presently exist within the City and the areas affected by the proposed project. Thresholds for significance are defined either by standards adopted by responsible or trustee agencies or by referring to criteria in CEQA, Appendix G. 3.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is located in the Coachella Valley, in the eastern portion of Riverside County. The Valley is abundant with both plant and animal life. Topographical relief ranges from 237 feet below mean sea level (msl) to about 2,000 feet above msl. The Valley is surrounded by the San Jacinto Mountains, the Santa Rosa Mountains, the Orocopia Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountain Range. The San Andreas fault transects the northeastern edge of the Valley. Local Environmental Setting The subject site is vacant, but has been partially disturbed in the past. The Overall project uses as proposed are consistent with the General Plan and zoning currently in effect; however, a conditional use permit is required by the zoning, as more than 200 square feet of outdoor display/storage is proposed. EA96325 A - Less Than Significant Impact. The project does not propose uses inconsistent with the current or future land uses contemplated for the project area However, the project is in close proximity to residential uses, located 500 feet north of the Whitewater Channel and 200 feet east across Jefferson. A conditional use permit is required to ensure that the project maintains compatibility with adjacent and surrounding land uses. Specific conditions related to the establishment and operation of the project will be incorporated into the approval conditions to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. 3.2 POPULATION AND HOUSING Regional Environmental Setting The City's population as of January,1996 is estimated by the State Department of Finance to be 19,046 persons. In addition to permanent residents, the City has approximately 9,300 seasonal residents who spend three to six months in the City (WDL Economic Overview; 1996 Ed.). It is estimated that 30% of all housing units in the City are used by seasonal residents. The average occupancy is 2.85 persons per occupied unit (1990 Census). Local Environmental Setting The site is designated Mixed Regional Commercial (M/RC) on the City's General Plan Land Use Policy Diagram. The area to the north is designated residential; to the east lies the City of Indio, which designates Neighborhood Commercial in their General Plan along Highway I I I (Indio General Plan 2020, October 1993). A - No Impact The project does not involve a housing component. Development of the project site as proposed is consistent with the land use designation set forth in the La Quinta General Plan. The proposal will not exceed any current growth forecasts currently available to or used by the City, based on the buildout scenarios in the General Plan. B, C - Less Than Significant Impact The project development may induce growth in the I I I corridor area, due to extension and upgrade of existing infrastructure in the site vicinity. It is not anticipated to stimulate residential development significantly, as the commercial nature of the project would indicate that an adequate population base exists to support this use. There may be some limited effects on affordable housing demand as employees attempt to locate in proximity to the site. Commercial development has been slow to occur along the corridor, and there is a significant amount of vacant land designated for residential development which will be more than adequate to supply any housing demand increase. There is also substantial residential inventory in the northerly residential areas of the City and more affordable single family units in the Cove area (Source: EA 92- 241; LQGP). Additionally, the City has acquired three sites specifically targeted for affordable housing development, one of which is an approximately 40 acre site at the northwest comer of Jefferson and 48th Avenue. This site is less than '/2 mile from the project area, and the City is currently entering into a development agreement with a potential developer. 3.3 EARTH RESOURCES Regional Environmental Sating The City of La Quinta has a varied topography, from gently sloping alluvial fans, steep hillside, to relatively flat desert floor. The alluvial soils that make up most of the City's soil types are underlain by igneous -metamorphic rock, as seen in outcrops in the Santa Rosa Mountains and the Coral Reef Mountains. Soils on the Valley floor are made up of very fine grain unconsolidated silty sands. EA96325 Local Environmental Setting The site is approximately 60 feet above sea level, and consists of Myoma series soils. This soil type has rapid permeability is commonly used for homesites and other urban uses. While it can be used in development of croplands, it is not considered as prime agricultural sal as classified by the State. The site is located within a Grounshaking Zone 4, referenced as a moderate level of shaking activity. There are no active faults in the area (EA 92-241; LQMEA). A - No Impact The project will not present any additional exposure to geologic hazards associated with fault rupture, as no faults have been identified on or in proximity to the site. The existing physical conditions in the area will not be changed in a manner which would create any impacts beyond those associated with development of the site in accordance with the General Plan. B - Potentially Significant unless Mligated. The project will be located in a Groundshaldng Zone 4, associated with moderate impacts fiom seismic activity. The groiect will be required to adhere to seismic reinforcement and other requirements as called for by the UBC. C,D,E - No Impact Although the site is identified as susceptible to moderate groundshaking impact, the soil characteristics indicate that ground failure due to such activity is negligible, based on its use in urbanized development. The site is not identified as subject to liquefaction potential, and there is no potential for seiche, tsunami or volcanic activity. The site is level and not subject to slide or mudflow impacts. The Whitewater Channel does not significantly affect the property during drainage flows (LQMEA; EA 92-241; site history). F - Less Than Significant Impact. There will be some change in surface features due to project grading. Such changes will affect stability of the site as the natural substructure is modified. Soil erosion potential will be affected due to loosening and movement of soil material during development. Standard erosion control and soil management methods as identified in soil reports and addressed in grading plans required for the site will ensure that such impacts will not be significant. CVWD will require the Whitewater Channel be lined in accordance with their standards, mitigating potential long term erosion impacts. Submittal of a dust control plan as required (see Air Quality) will aid in wind erosion reduction. GAJ - No Impact. The site is not identified as being subject to subsidence or having soils which are expansive There are no unique geologic or physical features on the site with respect to Earth issues (LQMEA; site survey) 3.4 WATER Regional Environmental Setting Groundwater resources in the La Quinta area consist of a system of large aquifers (porous layer of rock mated al) and groundwater basins separated by bedrock or layers of soil that trap or retain groundwater. Water supplies are also augmented with surface water from the Colorado River transported via the Coachella Canal and stored at Lake Cahuilla. Percolation from the tributaries of the Whitewater River flowing into La Quinta from the Santa Rosa Mountains provide a natural source of groundwater replenishment. Artificial recharging of groundwater will be a requirement in the near future. EA96325 Local Environmental Silting The vicinity of the proposed project is protected from design storms by the Whitewater Channel flood control facility and other improvements. The site is level and incorporates well drained soils. The site is designated Zone X on the federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps in effect for the area, subject to 500 year flood events and 100 year events with average depths of less than 1 foot. A - Less Than Significant Impact Current runoff rates will be increased due to pad, building and hardscape area development The runoff produced by development of this site will be directed to the Whitewater Channel, along the north boundary of the site. The Channel will be concrete lined along the project boundary, and is capable of accommodating the increased flows. The gWect will be required to orepare a drainaaepl n and comely with NPDES permit requirements as enforced by the Public Works J2CRartment. B through If - No Impact The area is currently protected from flood impacts by existing flood control facilities, specifically the Whitewater Channel. Surface waters and streams will not be affected, and ground water resource quantity and quality will not be significantly impacted. Compliance with the NPDES requirements attached to the Project Permitting will ensure that storm water runoff associated with the projects development will not create any measurable impact to water quality, quantity or hazards. 3.5 AIR QUALITY Regional Environmental Setting The Coachella Valley is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and is located in the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB). SEDAB has a distinctly different air pollution problem than the South Coast Air Basin (SOCAB). Currently, the SEDAB does not meet federal standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter. Local Environmental Selling The City is located in the Coachella Valley, which has an and climate, characterized by hot summers, mild winters, infrequent and low annual rainfall, and low humidity. Variations in rainfall, temperatures, and localized winds occur throughout the Valley due to the presence of the surrounding mountains. Air quality conditions are closely tied to the prevailing winds of the region. In the Coachella Valley, the standards for PM 10 are frequently exceeded. PM10 is particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter that become suspended in the air primarily due to winds, grading activity, and by vehicles on unpaved roads. The Valley is currently designated by the EPA as aserious non -attainment area for PM10, however SCAQMD anticipates that recent data will show that the Valley has been in attainment over the last three years. Based on this, SCAQMD is in the process of preparing a PM10 Maintenance Plan in order to have the area redesignated to attainment status. A - Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. Based on the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the project will have a potentially significant air quality impact. The traffic study for Jefferson Plaza indicates that 11,502 daily. vehicle trips will be generated by the overall project (Traffic Impact Analysis; Jefferson Plaza, O'Rourke Engineering, June 11,1996). Air quality analysis conducted for the proposal indicates that long term emissions exceed SEDAB thresholds for reactive organic gases (ROG) by 5501/6 and carbon monoxide (CO) by 590% (SCREEN.XLS; SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook). These emission exceedences are directly related to mobile (vehicular) sources. The La Quinta General Plan's "Statement of Overriding Considerations", adopted by Council Resolution 92-80, identified that impacts to air quality cannot be fully mitigated under long term development of the General Plan. This project is consistent with the General Plan in that the proposed land use and project intensity is consistent with the designation of the property as Mixed/Regional Commercial. However, to be in conformance with the General Plan, the project must also comply with General Plan policies regarding its development in order to mitigate these impacts to the full extent feasible. This would make the project consistent with the General Plan, for which overriding considerations have been adopted. The City has adopted a Transportation Demand Management Ordinance (TDM), which is applicable to all new development projects projected to employ 100 or more persons; based on the ordinance, this project will employ 437 persons. In order to reduce vehicular emissions_ th�Lcant shall be reau iri ed to prepare and submit a TDM Plan in accordance with the plpvisions of the City's Transportation Demand Management Ordinance The Plan hall address capital improvement and operational standards as fisted in the Ordinance AM transit related improvements required by Sunline as a condition to development will not constitute compliance with the plan submittal requirement. Several policies promote the concept of pedestrian accesibility and alternative travel modes, which assist in both air quality and circulation impact mitigation (Policies 9-2.1.2, 9-2.1.3, 9-4.1.4). Policy 9-2.1.4 requires the City to discourage design in retail/commercial uses which aggravate air quality, such as drive -through windows and circuitous circulation. Conditions attached to the prrgject will prohibit any drive through uses_ unless adequate documentation can be presented at the time any such use may be proposed that the use will not increase ar quality inacts any similar non -drive through use. As pan of the design review process, staff directed Home Depot to minimize on -site traffic conflicts, specifically the parking and circulation layout, to help reduce air quality impacts. At the Planning Commission meeting of July 23, 1996, this issue was reviewed and referred back to staff for resolution. As a result, Home Depot indicates their corporate standard requires a minimum of 500 spaces along the front of the store. The site design shows 440 spaces at the front area of the building; staffs request to redesign the parking to provide a through traffic aisle, originating from the southerly access off Jefferson Street, would result in a reduction of 16-20 spaces. Home Depot is reluctana to redesign the circulation, as it will require a reduction, albeit minimal, in the current number of parking spaces provided relative to their stated needs. Home Depot's parking information indicates that maximization of parking would help to mitigate impacts to air quality, in that it would reduce automobile idling times due to waiting and/or circling for available spaces. While a reduction in spaces could be argued to force a shift from auto to transit or carpool (associated more with office uses), the nature of the retailers (home improvement products, gas station, drive through, etc) perpetuates the need for individual mobility. The apalicant shall submit empirical documentation to adequately auantify and address the air Quality and circulation impacts associated with the circulation layout as it relates to the impacts from the entire site The documentation shall address both sta s redesign request and the configuration as currentlyproaosed and shall ramify any air quality benefits associated with either alternative The final parking lot layout shall be determined by the Communes Development Director, based upon the ndings contained in and submitted as documentation "r to any site deveLepment pgrinits being issued for any portionthe site,in grading -or site clearing requests. On September 3, the City received an air quality analysis based upon the applicant's preferred site plan and anotherplan showing requested revisions made by the City. This analysis indicates that there is a negligible variation in air quality between the two alternatives, and that neither plan would result in impacts based on national or state ambient air quality standards.CO concentrations associated with both parking lot designs indicated only minor differences, primarily related to shifts in CO hot -spot locations. Short term (construction -related) impacts will result primarily from grading activities, which will generate fugitive dust. Prior to aay soil disturbance or gEadingcgvitAiesl the developer shall secure approval of a FEugitive Dust Control Plan (FDCP)The plan shall address all ppnptued development areas as well as those areas which may be disturbed by activity but scheduled for later development The FDCP shall be submitted with any clearing,gradingor other site activity request which will disturb or is related to development of the site 10 Although these measures will not fully mitigate the air quality impacts from this project below significance thresholds, inclusion of them will render the proposal consistent with the General Plan, for which a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" was adopted. B,CM - No Impact. The proposed project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. The La Quinta High School is the nearest non-residential sensitive receptor, and is located over''/2 mile from the site. Residential receptor areas exist to the north and east of the site. Construction -related air quality impacts will occur primarily from grading activities and other soil disturbances. The required FRCP will address these short-term construction impacts. Long term impacts from roadway emissions due to cumulative impacts of growth in accordance with the La Quinta General Plan were considered in the EIR document. The project has no potential to effect any climatological change, and should not create any objectionable odor(s). The proposed uses are commercial/retail in nature, and the Home Depot will have no known manufacturing or processing on the site, beyond minor operations such as paint mixing or color matching, which could be considered odor producing. 3.6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Regional Environmental Silting The existing circulation system is a combination of early roadwork constructed by Riverside County and new and resurfaced roadways since incorporation of the City in 1982. Key roadways include State Highway 111, Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, Miles Avenue and 50th Avenue. Traffic volumes in La Quinta experience considerable seasonal variation, with the late winter/early spring months representing the peak tourist season and highest traffic volumes. Local Environmental Setting The project is bounded by two major City thoroughfares; Highway I I I and Jefferson Street, the traffic study prepared for Jefferson Plaza indicates that existing average daily traffic (ADT) counts on these roadways are 34,941 and 10,036 respectively. Current geometries for Highway I I I along the project frontage consists of four travel lanes with painted median and no curb/gutter; Jefferson Street is a two-lane road with raised medians and two north and three southbound left turn pockets (Traffic Impact Analysis; Jefferson Plaza, O'Rourke Engineering, June 11, 1996; Site Survey). The La Quinta General Plan establishes a minimum Level of Service (LOS) "D" for all intersections during A.M. or P.M peak hours without adequate mitigation. LOS is a hierarchical classification of qualitative measures of traffic flow, ranging from A (free flow) to F (unacceptable saturation). A - Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. The project will unquestionably create increased trips and congestion. The traffic study prepared for Jefferson Plaza indicates that 11,502 daily vehicle trips will be generated by the overall project (Traffic Impact Analysis; Jefferson Plaza, O'Rourke Engineering, June 11, 1996). The study contains several recommendations for intersection and roadway geometric improvements which are represented as mitigating the impacts of increased traffic. Th�plicant shall dedicate and install all irprovements as deemed necessary by the Public Works Department in accordance with the conditions of approval for the p-r9Ject and any development agn ment(s). Due to air quality impacts identified, this project is required to submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM), which will include provisions to reduce vehicle trips and provide facilities to encourage and accommodate alternative modes of transportation. State law currently pending would preclude air districts from enforcing trip reduction strategies; in the SCAQMD subregions, this relates to Regulation XV, or Rule 1501, which required any employer of 100 or tare persons to prepare a ridesharing strategy plan for that worksite. The City's ordinance is modeled upon the SCAQMD rule, and was adopted in 1992 in order to implement the 11 Riverside County Congestion Management Plan (CMP) B - Less Than Significant Impact. The project incorporates several driveway locations along Jefferson Street and Highway 111. Proposed signal locations at Vista Grande and Jefferson Street and the westerly access along Highway 111, as proposed in the traffic study for existing conditions plus the project, will reduce traffic safety impacts significantly. Additionally, the easterly access along Highway 111 (at the proposed gas station location) could present a hazard from traffic turning west onto Highway 111 from northbound Jefferson Street. Traffic from this approach attempting to enter that point may conflict with other traffic as it crosses travel lanes. The site plan shows less than 200 feet available to accomplish this maneuver. However, this access point can be appropriately modified and is not anticipated to create intersection congestion, as it will not cause upstream traffic (i.e., traffic heading into the intersection as opposed to heading out) to be affected. Traffic safety improvements as typically required of new development will also provide reductions in traffic hazard impacts, commensurate with development of the site, and should improve the overall safety level of the intersection in general. The driveway locations at the southern and easternmost access points on Jefferson and Highway I11. respectively, shall be shifted in order to be in compliance with Circulation policies of the La Ouinta General Plan • specifically Policy 3-3 1 3 pertaining to minimum 250 foot spacing between curb returns for access points. C Through G- No Impact The project as mitigated will not impede or restrict emergency access requirements, and provides for adequate access to surrounding uses. The project provides for parking areas which exceed the City's parking requirements by 28%; therefore, no parking impacts will be created by the proposal which were not addressed and provided for in the specific plan. The project will be conditioned to provide for alternative transportation infrastructure, which will be identified through the submittal of a TDM Plan as conditioned. Any transit improvements determined necessary by Sunline Transit will be conditioned as part of the project's approval. The site is not proximate to, nor is it affected by water, air or rail traffic. 3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta lies within the Colorado Desert. Two ecosystems are found within the City; the Sonoran Desert Scrub and the Desert Transition. The disturbed environments within the City are classified as urban or agricultural. A discussion of these ecosystems is found in the LQMEA. Local Environmental Setting The subject area is vacant, with fairly level terrain and minimal vegetation. The native vegetation is desert scrub, but the majority of the site has been disturbed by clearing and leveling in recent history. A sandy dune along the northerly edge of the project site (along the project boundary) is the only remaining feature which is largely undisturbed (Cultural Resources Survey; The Home Depot, Keith Companies, April 1996). The LQMEA identifies the entire site as within the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard habitat area, for which a federal l0A permit was obtained pursuant to adoption of the CVFTL Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). A through E - No Impact. The site has been predorninantly disturbed by previous leveling activities, primarily related to maintenance activities associated with CVWD operations along the Whitewater Channel. There is negligible potential for wildlife habitat to exist on the site. Mitigation fees will be conditioned to be paid for the CVFTL prior to any land disturbance or grading permits being issued for the site. There are no significant or otherwise predominant tree stands or other vegetation on the site. No wetland areas are shown to be on or traverse the site, and the location of the site adjacent to two major roads and a flood control facility precludes any potential migration of wildlife. 12 3.8 ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta contains both areas of insignificant and significant Mineral Aggregate Resources Areas (SMARA), as designated by the State Department of Conservation. There are no known oil resources in the City. Major energy resources used in the City cam form the Imperial Irrigation District (RID), Southern California Gas Company, and gasoline companies. Local Environmental Setting The site does not he within an identified area sensitive to mineral resources. Soils within the site consist of Myoma fine sand; these soils are well -drained and permeable, and can be used for agricultural uses. A, B - No Impact The proposed project has no potential to impact energy or mineral resources in any manner which could be considered wasteful. Construction of the project will be required to meet State energy standards as typically enforced by the Building and Safety Department, and to comply with conservation policies as established in the La Quinta General Plan. 3.9 RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH Regional Environmental Setting Although large scale, hazardous waste generating employment is not yet located within La Quinta, the existence of chemicals utilized in dry cleaning operations, agricultural operations, restaurant kitchen cleaning, landscape irrigation and exposure to large scale electrical facilities may post significant threats to various sectors of the population. Currently, there are no hazardous disposal waste sites located in Riverside County; transportation of such materials out of and through La Quinta takes place. Local Environmental Setting The project site is vacant and has not been used for any type of manufacturing in the past. A - Less Than Significant Impact. There is negligible potential for additional risk or health hazard due to the project, or any effect on emergency response or potential fire hazard. The Home Depot will have on -site storage and sales of certain amounts of chemical compounds in various packaging (i.e., pool supplies, fertilizers, insect and gardening products), and other household chemical constituents. Storage and inventory of potentially hazardous products are regulated by State and Federal legislation, and will also be subject to Fire and Health Department standards as in effect and applicable at the time. B Through E - No Impact The project does not have any potential to interfere with emergency response or create any health hazards. The site is not susceptible to increased fire hazards form the project, related to brush, grass or trees. 3.10 NOISE Regional Environmental Setting Noise levels in the City are created by a variety of sources in and near the City. The major sources include vehicular noise on City streets and Highway 111, and temporary construction noises. The ambient noise levels are dominated by vehicular noise along the highway and major arterials. Local Environmental Setting Primary noise sources in the subject area are associated with vehicle traffic, and various short -tern noise sources associated with urbanized residential and commercial uses. The property is vacant and therefore not a current source of noise impact. 13 AM - Less Than Significant Impact. Increases in noise levels are anticipated due to the proposal. Roadway noise will increase as traffic volumes increase. Most of the on -site uses will be operational during daytime and early evening hours. The majority of residential areas are not proximate to the project; however, some existing residential uses across Jefferson Street will likely be the most impacted from this development, primarily from traffic noise. However, the complex is currently proximate to a convenience store and other commercial uses, and as a higher density residential use is typically sited to serve as a transition between commercial and lower density land uses. The residences along Vista Grande will absorb a measurable amount of noise from Jefferson Street traffic, but it is not anticipated to be significant in consideration of the traffic volumes which already exist. Activity from the commercial uses will also affect area residents from both noise and visual impacts. The pMiect will be required to provide an eight -foot barrier wall to mitigate noise impacts from the entire site. specifically along the CVWD Channel frontage subject to functional and aesthetic design review by the City. 3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES Regional Environmental Setting Law enforcement services are provided to the City through a contract with the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. Fire protection service is provided to the City by Riverside County Fire Department. The Fire Department administers two stations in the City; Station #32 on Frances Hack Lane, and Station 470, at the intersection of Madison Street and Avenue 54. Paramedic services are provided by Springs Ambulance Service. Health care services are provided in the City through JFK Memorial Hospital in Indio, and the Eisenhower Immediate Care Clinic located in the One -Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center. Local Environmental Setting Station #32 and Station #70 are located approximately 4 1/2 miles south of the project site. Governmental services in La Quinta are provided by City staff at the Civic Center. A through E - No Impact. The project will not measurably impact public services, based upon comments received on the project. All necessary public services can be provided to the project without compromising any existing levels of public service. The proponents will have to pay school fees as established by Desert Sands Unified School District for commercial projects. 3.12 UTILITIES Regional Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is served by the Imperial Irrigation District (IDS) for electrical power supply and the Southern California Gas Company (SCG) for natural gas service. General Telephone Exchange (GTE) provides telephone services for the City. Continental Cablevision services the area for cable television service. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) provides water and sewer service to the City. CVWD obtains its water from underground aquifers and from the Colorado River. The City's stormwater drainage system is administered by CVWD, which maintains and operates a comprehensive system to collect and transport flows through the City. The City is served by Waste Management of the Desert for solid waste disposal. Nonhazardous, mixed municipal solid waste is taken to three landfills within the Coachella Valley, Local Environmental Setting The subject site is undeveloped at present. Street and flood control improvements have been partially completed, along with sewer and water line extensions being in place. Some utility trunk extensions and connections will be necessary to develop the property. 14 A through F - Less Than Significant Impact The proposed project will require some degree of alteration to existing facilities; however, the responses received from the responsible purveyors do not present any sigrificant concerns. 3.13 AESTHETICS Local Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta is partially located within a desert valley cove. There are hillsides to the west and south of the City. Views of the desert and surrounding mountains are visible on clear days throughout most of the City. Views of the Santa Rosa and Coral Reef Mountains exist to the south and west. A, B. Less Than Significant Impact The project will have limited impact on scenic vistas, as there are no scenic viewsheds identified in the LQMEA. The height of the proposed structures may block some view lines, but the impact will be lessened as most residential views in the area do not originate within a close proximity of the project and therefore have extended line of sight perspectives. The primary concern is with impact due to the building's visibility from the residential units to the north and across Jefferson at Vista Grande. These are views into the rear portions of the complex, which are not designed with any consideration to "soften" the aesthetic impact. The prcjec t will be rem inn Met& additional design treatments and to establish an adequate landscape buffer to mitigate view imFarts associated with a blank stgl4ture and rear cannon areas C - Potentialy Significant Unless Mitigated. As a commercial project the proposal will create additional light and glare. The City has adopted a "Dark Sky" ordinance which regulates lighting types and shielding characteristics. The developer shall submit a lighting plan in compliance with the provisions of the Outdoor Liaht Control ordinance 3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES Regional Environmental Setting The most likely locations of prehistoric cultural resources in the La Quinta area are along the foothills. The settling of the La Qumta area has been chronicled by the La Quints, Historical Society in several publications and museum exhibits. There are 13 designated historical structures and sites recorded on the California Historic Resources Inventory. These resources are listed in the La Quinta General Plan. Local Environmental Setting The proposal is located along Highway 111, a developing urbanized commercial area; there is little likelihood that any cultural resources exist in the area. No historic structures exist in the immediate area. A.B - Less Than Significant Impact There are no potential impacts to cultural resources due to the proposal. A sandy dune along the northerly edge of the project site (along the project boundary) is the only remaining feature which is largely undisturbed. A cultural resources assessment was prepared for the project site and portions of the surrounding area The report indicates that the area has a high degree of archaeologic sensitivity, with a total of41 sites recorded within one mile of the property (Cultural Resources Survey; The Home Depot, Keith Companies, April, 1996). However, on the site itselC no significant artifacts were discovered. The report concluded that no further mitigation is necessary for this site. The City shall adhere to its standard requirement for a trained archaeological monitor to be present during gmding gperations to coordinate r�_ove of any potential artifacts which may be uncovered C Through E - The cultural resources survey did not identify any historic resources on the site beyond some mid-20th century foundation remnants. Development of the project has no potential to affect cultural values, and no existing religious uses are associated with the site. 15 3.15 RECREATION Local Environmental Setting The City of La Quinta has adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan that assesses the existing resources and facilities and the future needs of the City. The City contains approximately 28.7 acres of developed parkland for Quimby Act purposes. There are also bike and equestrian pathways and trails within the City and designated pedestrian hiking trails. A, B - No Impaet The proposed project will not affect demand for recreational facilities or existing recreation. While the project will attract additional customer base from within La Quinta and other communities, it is not likely that the project will attract a significant number of new residents beyond those which may relocate for employment purposes. 61 U Y LINK To u:► I 1 10 I Ia 1 1 L1-I ;_ e_ The Initial Study for the Specific Plan/Use Permit identified potentially significant impacts associated with the project, as summarized in the areas of Earth Resources, Air Quality, Transportation/Circulation and Aesthetics. The following findings can be made regarding the mandatory findings of significance set forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines and based on the results of this environmental assessment: a) The proposed Specific Plan/Use Permit will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, as the project in question will not be developed in any manner inconsistent with the General Plan and other current City standards, b) The proposed Specific Plan/Use Permit will not have the potential to achieve short term goals, to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals, as the proposed project will not alter the types or intensity of the commercial uses already contemplated in the General Plan, c) The proposed Specific Plan/Use Permit will not have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, in that the proposed project, whether approved or not, is a consistent representation of the project type to be proposed for the site as long as the current General Plan land use and zoning designations are applicable, and the impacts as identified in the Initial Study will remain similar. d) The proposed Specific Plan/Use Permit will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, as the project contemplates uses similar to those already assessed under ultimate development of the La Quinta General Plan, and which were addressed in the EIR previously certified for the General Plan. SECTION 5• EARLIER ANALYSES A. Earlier Analyses Used. The following documents were used and/or referred to in the preparation of this assessment: • La Quinta General Plan Update, October 1992 • La Quinta Master Environmental Assessment, October 1992 • SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993 16 • Cultural Resources Survey; The Home Depot, Keith Companies, April, 1996 • Traffic Impact Analysis; Jefferson Plaza, O'Rourke Engineering, June 11, 1996 • Environmental Assessment 92-241; prepared for Specific Plan 92-022 and Plot Plan 92-490. • On -site Circulation and Air Quality Analysis; Jefferson Plaza, O'Rourke Engineering, August 28, 1996 These and various other documents on file with the Community Development Department were used in the preparation of this Initial Study. B. Impacts Adequately Addressed. The following potentially significant impacts identified in the checklist were determined as adequately addressed by the previously listed documents: ♦ Earth Resources ♦ Air Quality ♦ Transportation/Circulation ♦ Aesthetics C. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures are discussed in this addendum where underlined. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) has been prepared for the project that will become a part of the conditions of approval attached to the project approvals and permits. Prepared by: Date: Wallace H. Nesbit Associate Planner EA96325 zz ww Q U W 0 A WUW OU a U �O z EA 0 w a o a a a� d y CL cn o CO Mz o 00 %6 �b c+ m a. a C.0� U A f� � PG U o� U C7 Ewa O w �O w o � w a Mz o d �za �91 $ c \� a � Q E\ § § q 2 & ( \ \ d � 2 5 Q , u // �■ ® 3 &2 At e m � s ¥ M QOw m _ � \ � Q q§ E to t k� i § o �\ ��\ § LW c k cis 0 § } § J ¢a a 3e § IE $ c dq §o §& u E§ ■ q�2 2 ou ue � U & g ■ 0 § 6 ■ q. � � ] �� Q e e Q ■ k% $ 88$ .- $ k /Q J�/ �\ e a . © k 2 � % m� � Ie2 k e �$ §t\ / E ¥ u § & �19 | - � « 0 \� c u Eb . ■ \ 4 � %2 % K & k t § � # � � \RCO-: kk �co � t § §WD .0 ■ ■ � � t k o � \ s ■ ■ 028\ �§ ■/ k% Q E � 2 k # ZZ » § 3 E= c Q Q ■ & z $\ / tK J § ) § ; ■ cc § m A V pq eA a� o mae a m MA .y w L :; ,�' eta o � wl ;,, 1. CS G A A rn O cw a x a A X m EA z .. z e R co cl « y p r/� Q ,� z V d •• ,C C b� F R UU Id , U R rA R h zz o d A a� a U OU � w a W C C7 � F L L ,CO yy GL R w �a z� �a c o A w � U �i ^ a o0 a �z a � es y ++ a+ r R rA w.�p miaow.: � R Ua OF O r r- A d a WUW OU 0� U G7 �O z� a� �a w �1 WW ego �� evi z o z CO M $ 0 d� $§ 2 u E/ � § ■ u U A § 0 w2 $§ 0 § � C § # � \ � ?�S / k 2 k�F - % H Q §. , saw / o §23 2 § c k� �§ a �U E/ k 2 2 E � � k E � 3�� §�7 � k K U §§ �� @o �� �2 �\ §� _ o � �\ r4 ■ CL / «% CA ova § k2 5 A z� a r�G UU W o 'b a U � � 0 wW G� F c •p a� C7 a d �O W� G4 0•�� m M d 5 * C6 x a�•o o 0 �z rn F � G 3� W •• C 0 IL �z� o A o� U U 5� F �O z� 0 a� CA b o .0 a � �z o za 9 $ c \� � § Q E/ v � k� { �S j » / §A� 3■ low a§t U \§ Q uJ u« § ,r. ■ k\ \t3 k r @ 7 ` ��k�� t,. m - \f Qg $\ Q§ CODk .,t\ cr §E&cl A nr r•1 O UU a, ° a � ' s b a5 � fl� 0 O 8 'o G7 �z �o � eo v O._ Q U•� o:: U W Mz�e� o �, oq rnrn a a U F A a r"G WUW OU �O O� a� �a 0 w r Q w z� w Ww � kn Mz o �za