CC Resolution 2003-005 RESOLUTION 2003-005
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
FOR A DEVELOPMENT AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
AVENUE 48 AND ADAMS STREET
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-466
CITY OF LA QUINTA / RGC COURTHOMES, INC.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 7th day of January, 2003, hold duly noticed Public Hearing for Environmental
Assessment 2002-466, for a project located at the northeast corner of Avenue 48 and
Adams Street, more particularly described as follows:
Assessor's Parcel Number 649-030-069
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment 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 2002-466)
and has determined that although the proposed development could have a significant
adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case
because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the Assessment and 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 certify said Environmental Assessment:
1. The proposed Development will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or
general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no
significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment
2002-466.
2. The proposed Development will not have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population
to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number, restrict the range of rare or endangered plants
or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory.
Resolution 2003-005
Environmental Assessment 2002-466
Santa Rosa Development
Adopted: January 7, 2003
Page 2
3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the
potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the
wildlife depends.
4. The proposed Development does not have the potential to achieve short-term
environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as
no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the
Environmental Assessment.
5. The proposed Development will not result in impacts which are individually
limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed
development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will
not be significantly affected by the proposed project.
6. The proposed Development will not have environmental effects that will
adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no
significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk
potential or public services.
7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may
have a significant effect on the environment.
8. The City Council has considered the Environmental Assessment 2002-466 and
the Environmental Assessment reflects the independent judgment of the City.
9. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of
adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d).
10. The location and custodian of the City's recoi~ls relating to this project is the
Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La
Quinta, California.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of
the City Council for this Environmental Assessment.
Resolution 2003-005
Environmental Assessment 2002-466
Santa Rosa Development
Adopted: January 7, 2003
Page 3
2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2002-466 for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental
Assessment Checklist on file in the Community Development Department and
attached hereto.
3. That Environmental Assessment 2002-466 reflects the independent judgment
of the City.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
City Council held on this 7th day of January, 2003, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Henderson, Osborne, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Adolph
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None .~ ~
DON ADOLPH, ~ayor
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
, C, City C~erk
City of La Quinta, California
(CITY SEAL)
Resolution 2003-005
Environmental Assessment 2002-466
Santa Rosa Development
Adopted: January 7, 2003
Page 4
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
· KATHE~NE JE~_.SO/N, City At'ney
City of La Quinta, California
Environmental Checklist Form
EA 2002-466
1. Project Title: A Specific Plan, Site Development Permits, Vesting
Tentative Tract Maps, and Disposition and Development
Agreement for a market rate and affordable single family
housing project.
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jerry Herman, 760-777-7125
4. Project Location: Northeast corner of Adams Street and Avenue 48.
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:
City of La Quinta RGC CourtHomes, Inc.
78-495 Calle Tampico 101 Shipyard Way, Suite G
La Quinta, CA 92253 Newport Beach, CA 92663
6. General Plan Designation: HDR High Density up to 16 du/ac
7. Zoning: Regional Commercial (CR)
8. 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.)
A Specific Plan, two Vesting Tentative tract Maps, two Site Development
Permits, and a Disposition and Development Agreement to allow the
construction of 148 senior affordable detached houses averaging 1238 sq ft on
individual lots on approximately 20 acres, and 36 single family market rate
dwelling units on approximately 12 acres. The senior project proposes single
story units with 2 and 3 bedroom floor plans. The development will be accessed
from Avenue 48 and is planned to have a gated entry to the interior private streets.
This access is intended to be left-in as well as left-out. There will be emergency
access between the Affordable Site and the Market Rate site to provide the
secondary access for emergencies through each. The houses are accessed
directly from the private streets and from motor court drives shared by 4 to 6 houses
(Typical). There is an existing CVWD well site on the Southeast corner of the site.
Another CVWD well site is proposed at the Northwest corner of the site. The
project will have a recreation facility near the project entry that will include a pool
and Recreation Building with about 15 parking spaces. The houses all have 2 car
garages and 2 patio areas, one in the front and one on the side.
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd
1
There are no rear or side yards to speak of. The usable yard is the front patio area.
There will be some sizable front setbacks from the main streets to provide extra
landscape treatment. The houses are to be typically separated by only 6 feet.
Parking is provided on the private streets and the current plan shows about 100
spaces in parking cutouts and parallel conditions. There are three retention areas
planned and all of them are expected to double as open spaces areas. The
retention ponds will pick up water from Avenue 48 and some from the Market Rate
site. In addition there is a small open space near the center of the project for
passive recreation uses.
The project will be walled on the property edge and will be fenced along the Avenue
48 frontage. It is expected that the domestic water will be looped from a connection
on Avenue 48 through the Market Rate site to Adams. The dirt to create the fill
needed for this site will come from the Market Rate site. It is expected that the site
will be raised 3 to 5 feet. The other utilities will come from Avenue 48 or the closest
connection point.
The Market Rate project will be 36 detached houses averaging 2400 sq ft on
10,000 sq ft lots. There will be two base models with the potential for casitas
additions on each allowing for 4 model types. Access will be from Avenue 48
through a gated entry. The entry would only be a left in with no left out. The interior
streets will be private with emergency access through the affordable site. Parking
will be provided on the private streets. Current plans show approximately 63
spaces in parallel cut-out areas. There is one retention area at the corner of
Avenue 48 and Adams. It will double as a passive recreation area and as corner
landscape open space. The project will be walled with exterior perimeter
landscaped.
The houses will be arranged around motor court drives. Those houses on the street
will have front patio areas. All houses will have rear yard areas. Each house will
have 2 or 3 garage parking spaces. Limited guest parking will be available in the
courts and on long driveways
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
North: Vacant desert lands which is developed with a retail center including a
Super Wal-mart, and 200 apartment project.
South: Rancho La Quinta Country Club which is developed with Low Density
Single Family Residential units and golf
West: Lake La Quinta Residential development which is developed with Single
Family Residential units.
East:Vacant desert lands
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
The La Quinta Redevelopment Agency DDA
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist,wpd
2
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by
the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Hazards and Hazardous Materials Public Services
Agriculture Resources Hydrology and Water Quality Recreation
Air Quality Land Use Planning Transportation/Traffic
Biological Resources Mineral Resources Utilities and Service
Systems
Cultural Resources Noise Mandatory Findings
Geology and Soils Population and Housing
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 applicant. 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" 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
pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
nothing further is required.
Date
~env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd 3
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 reference 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) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial
evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially
Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation
Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced
an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less 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
XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analysis 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). Earlier analysis are discussed
in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist.
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) The analysis of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question;
and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to
less than significance.
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd
4
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
I. AESTHETICS: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
(General Plan EIR p. II1-159 ff.)
b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state X
scenic highway? (General Plan EIR p. II1-159 ff.)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X
quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application
materials)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? X
(Application materials)
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: . In determining whether
impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural
Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the
California Dept. Of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the
project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use?
(General Plan EIR p. 111-21 ff.) X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) X
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could individually or X
cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural
use? (Aerial photographs)
III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the
following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable X
Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan?
(SCAQMD CEQA Handbook)
b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or
contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation?
(SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) X
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd 5
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.):
c) Result in a 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 x
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?. (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant x
concentrations?
(Project Description)
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people? (Project Description) x
Iv. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or x
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.)
b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, x
policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master
Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.)
c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either
individually or in x
combination with the known or probable impacts of other
activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means? (Master Environmental
Assessment p. 73 ff.)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established x
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
wildlife nursery sites? (Master Environmental Assessment p.
73 ff.)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or x
ordinance? (La Quinta Municipal Code; General Plan)
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation x
plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.)
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd 6
Potentially Significant Less Than
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing x
on the National Register of Historic Places, the California
Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic
resources? ("A Phase II Archaeological Study for the 50 acre
site .... "prepared by ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY GROUP,
June 1999)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
unique archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or
site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without
merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a x
high probability that it contains information needed to answer
important scientific research questions, has a special and
particular quality such as being the oldest or best available
example of its type, or is directly associated with a
scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event
or person)? ("A Phase II Archaeological Study for the 50 acre
site .... "prepared by ARCHAEOLOGICAL ADVISORY GROUP,
June 1999)
c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or x
site? (Master Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5.9)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred x
outside of formal cemeteries?
w. 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 Geologist for the area or based on other ×
substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan EIR p.
111-61 ff.)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR p. 111-61 x
ff.)
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ×
(General Plan EIR p. 111-61 ff.)
iv) Landslides? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff) x
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? x
(General Plan MEA p. 96 ff)
c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the project, and x
potentially result in on- or off-site landslides, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (General Plan
MEA p. 96 ff)
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd 7
Potentially
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of
the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks x
to life or property? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff)
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste x
water? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff)
v,. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the
project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials? (Application Materials) x
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the
environment? (Application Materials) X
c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or x
proposed school? (Application Materials
d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? x
(Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing)
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of
a public airport or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project x
area? (General Plan land use map)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would
the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) x
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan? (General Plan MEA p. 94 ff) x
h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) x
vm. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements? (General Plan EIRI x
p. 111-87 ff.)
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\D DA-48-adm-checklist.wpd 8
Potentially
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
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 x
local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted7 (General Plan EIR p. 111-87 ff.)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of
stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial x
erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (General Plan EIR p. 111-87
ff.)
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a x
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or off-site? (General Plan EIR p. 111-87 ff.)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the x
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
to control? (General Plan EIR p. 111-87 ff.)
f) Place housing within a lO0-year floodplain, as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map x
or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental
Assessment Exhibit 6.5)
g) Place within a l O0-year floodplain structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental x
Assessment Exhibit 6.5)
~x. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? (Project x
Description)
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project x
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
(General Plan p. 18 ff.)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural communities conservation plan? (Master x
Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.)
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd 9
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
x. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would
be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
(Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general
plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master X
Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.)
Xl. NOISE: Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in X
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
(General Plan MEA p. 110 ff.)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive X
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General
Plan MEA p. 110 ff.)
c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing X
without the project? (General Plan MEA p. 110 ff.)
d) 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 or working in the project area to excessive X
noise levels? (Master Environmental Assessment)
e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project expose people residing or working in the project X
area to excessive levels? (General Plan land use map)
POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:
XlI.
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and X
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, p. 9 ff.)
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing X
elsewhere? (Application Materials)
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd 10
Potentially
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application X
Materials)
Xlll. 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 MEA, p. 46 ff.) X
Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) X
Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) X
Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) X
Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) X
XIV. RECREATION:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility X
would occur or be accelerated? (Application Materials)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? X
(Application Materials)
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 X
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or
congestion at intersections)? (General Plan EIR, p. 111-29 ff.)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion X .
management agency for designated roads or highways?
(General Plan EIR, p. 111-29 ff.)
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd 1 1
Potentially
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): Potentially Significant Lass Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
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 safety risks? (General Plan EIR, p. 111-29 ff.) X
d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses X
(e.g., farm equipment)? (General Plan EIR, p. 111-29 ff.)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application X
Materials)
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application X
Materials)
g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative X
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
(Application Materials)
XVl. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General X
Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing X
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project X
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or
may serve the project determined that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition X
to the provider's existing commitments? (General Plan MEA,
p. 46 ff.)
f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted X
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
needs? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.)
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd 1 2
Potentially I
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact 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 X
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term,
to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? X
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current project, and the X
effects of probable future projects)?
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either X
directly or indirectly7
XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSIS.
Earlier analysis 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 analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review.
No earlier analysis were used in this 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.
Not applicable.
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.
See attached Addendum.
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist.wpd I 3
SOURCES:
Master Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 2002.
SCAQMD CEQA Handbook.
General Plan, City of La Quinta, 2002.
City of La Quinta Municipal Code
"A Phase II Archaeological Study for the 50 acre site owned by the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency Located on
the Northeast Corner of Avenue 48th and Adams Street," prepared by Archaeological Advisory Group, June 1999.
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-checklist,wpd 1 4
Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2002- 466
I. d) The proposed project proposes single story buildings with parking around the
buildings. The project is also designed to include recreational open space and
retention basins on the western and southern property lines, which will provide
separation between the parking lot and driveways and the single family
residential units. Parking lots and driveways will be lit as required by the
Development Code. The applicant will be required to meet the City's standards,
which require that no light spill onto adjacent properties. These standards, and
the project design, will lower potential impacts to a less than significant level.
III. a) The proposed project will generate air pollution primarily from the operation of
motor vehicles. The 149 senior affordable detached houses and 36 detached
single family units could generate approximately 140 trips per day~. (Senior
housing generates a lower trip rate than family housing.) Based on this trip
generation, the project at buildout will generate the following pollutants.
Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout
(pounds per day)
Total No. Vehicle Trips/day Avg. Trip Total
Length (miles) miles/day
140 x 6 = 840
Pollutant ROC CO NOx PMIO PM~o PM~o
Exhaust Tire Break
Wear Wear
Grams at 45 mph 84.00 1,873.20 336.00 8.40 8.40
Pounds at 45 mph 0.19 4.14 0.74 0.02 0.02
Daily Threshold* 75 550 1 O0 150
Based California Air Resources Board's EMFAC7G Emissions Model. Assumes Year 2005 summer:ime running
conditions at 75°F, light duty autos, catalytic. *Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance in
determining the significance of a project and the need for an EIR.
The proposed project will not exceed any threshold for the generation of moving
emissions, as established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District
in determining the need for an EIR. The impacts to air quality relating to
chemical pollution are not expected to be significant.
III. c) The Coachella Valley is a non-attainment area for PM10 (particulate matter of
10 microns or smaller). The construction of the proposed project has the
Institute of Transportation Engineers, "Trip Generation, 6th Edition," for category 251, Elderly Housing -
detached, and category 210, single family - detached.
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-addendum.wpd 1
potential to generate dust, which could contribute to the PM 10 problem in the
area. In order to control PM10, the City has imposed standards and
requirements on development to control dust. The applicant will be required to
submit a PM 10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity
at the site. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM10 can be
mitigated by the mitigation measures below.
1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to
minimize exhaust emissions.
2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary
power poles to avoid on-site power generation.
3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit
opportunities.
4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site.
5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre-watered to a depth of
three feet prior to the onset of grading activities.
6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed
on an on-going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the
site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered
regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall
be watered at the end of each work day.
7. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the
potential for wind erosion. The recreational open space landscaping on
the east side of the property, as well as the perimeter landscaping on
Avenue 48 and Adams Street, shall be installed with the construction of
the first building(s) on the site.
8. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of
construction-related dirt on approach routes to the site.
9. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage
ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality
from buildout will not be significant.
IV. a) The property is located in the Coachella Valley Fringe-Toed Lizard Fee Mitigation
Area. No other species has been identified for this area.
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-addendum.wpd 2
V. b) Phase II cultural resource survey was conducted for the subject property2. The
The Phase II analysis, however, determined that none of the remaining cultural
resources identified on the study area can be demonstrated to be unique or
significant under CEQA or Section 106 of the National Historic Pres Act,
archaeological monitoring of rough grading and major (e.g. sewer) trenching is
recommended should preservation prove unfeasible. Because the test program
only sampled the cultural resources present there is still a potential for as yet
undiscovered significant resources, as well as human cremation interments to
be present. Monitoring should be conducted by, or under the direct supervision
of, a Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA), or equivalent.
VI. a)i) & ii)
The proposed project lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as
with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the
event of a major earthquake. Structures on the site will be required to meet the
City's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building Code
requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the preparation
of site-specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of
grading plans. This requirement will ensure that impacts from ground shaking
are reduced to a less than significant level.
The subject property is subject to severe wind erosion hazards. The City
Engineer will require the preparation of PM 10 Management Plan to control the
potential for blowing dust from the project site. In addition, the mitigation
measures listed under Air Quality, above, will mitigate the potential impacts of
soil erosion to a less than significant level.
VIII. b)
Domestic water is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District from wells
in the Lower Thermal sub-basin. The project proponent will be required to
implement the City's standards for water conserving plumbing fixtures and on-
site retention, which both aid in reducing the potential impacts associated with
groundwater. The proposed project will also meet the requirements of the City's
water-conserving landscaping ordinance. These standards will reduce potential
impacts to a less than significant level.
"A Phase Il Archaeological Study for a 50 acre site Located on the Northeast Comer of Avenue 48'" and
Adams Street," prepared by Archaeological Advisory Group, June 1999.
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-addendum.wpd 3
VIII. c)&d)
The construction of buildings and parking lots will result in less land being
available for the percolation of water into the ground. The project has been
designed to include two retention basins within the southern section of the
recreational open space on the site. The City Engineer will require that these
retention basins retain the 1 O0 year 24 hour storm on-site. This will control the
amount of runoff which exits the site during a storm. The project's drainage
plan will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance
of grading permits. These standards will reduce the potential impacts associated
with surface water to a less than significant level.
XI. a) The proposed project occurs in an area with lower levels of traffic, which are
not expected to exceed the City's noise standards at buildout of the General
Plan. Further, the project will be surrounded by a wall, which will reduce interior
noise levels. Finally, the buildings proposed within the project site are a
minimum of 25 feet from the wall. This distance will provide further noise
attenuation.
Xl. c) The construction of the proposed project will result in temporary high noise
levels which could impact residential development to the south and west. In
order to reduce these potential impacts, the following mitigation measures shall
be implemented:
1. All internal combustion equipment operating within 500 feet of any
occupied residential unit shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers
and air intake silencers.
2. All stationary construction equipment (e.g. generators and compressors)
shall be located in the northeast corner of the site.
3. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the La
Quinta Municipal Code.
XlII. a)
The proposed project will have an impact on public services and will be served
by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City contract. Site
development will generate property tax which will offset the costs of added
police and fire services.
The project will be required to participate in the City's Impact Fee Program,
which helps to offset roadway improvement costs. Site development is not
expected to have a significant impact on municipal services or facilities.
G:\Mydata\WPDOCS\env info\DDA-48-adm-addendum.wpd 4