CC Resolution 2006-002 EIR 2005-549 Costco Wholesale & Komar Desert CenterRESOLUTION NO. 2006-002
A RESOLUTION IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA
QUINTA, CALIFORNIA CERTIFYING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT 2005-549 (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #2005081060)
PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2005-075; CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 2005-092; TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33960, AND SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-833 AS BEING ADEQUATE AND
COMPLETE;RECOGNIZING THE OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
TO CERTAIN ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS; AND
RECOGNIZING THE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED, BUT WHICH CAN BE
REASONABLY MITIGATED, IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS
IMPLEMENTED
CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 2005-549
APPLICANT: COSTCO WHOLESALE AND KOMAR INVESTMENTS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 3" day of January, 2006 hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request
of Costco Wholesale and Komar Investments (hereinafter "Applicants") for approval of
a Specific Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Tentative Parcel Map, and Site Development
Permit, (hereinafter "the Entitlement Approvals") to allow construction of a ±26.53
acre multi -phased mixed commercial project consisting of a 233,439 square feet of
commercial uses including a 149,739 square foot Costco Wholesale store and four bay
fueling station, and retail, office and restaurant uses (hereinafter "the Project"). The
Project site is located south of Highway 111 and Depot Drive, and more particularly
described as:
A.P.N.'S: 649-030-086,649-030-087,649-030-007, AND 649-030-088; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 22nd day of November, 2005 hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider
the request of the Applicants for approval of the Entitlement Approvals to allow
construction of the Project; and
WHEREAS, it was determined pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA
Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regs. Sections 15000 et seq.) that the Project could have
a significant effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report ("EIR"); and
WHEREAS, on August 5, 2005, the City of La Quinta, as lead agency
under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") of the EIR; mailed that NOP to
public agencies, organizations, and persons likely to be interested in the potential
impacts of the proposed Project; and
Resolution No. 2006-002
Environmental Impact Report 2005-549
Costco Wholesale and Komar Investments
Adopted: January 3, 2006
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City thereafter caused to be prepared a Draft
Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR"), which, taking into account the comments it
received on the NOP, described the Project and discussed the anticipated
environmental impacts resulting therefrom, and on October 26, 2005, circulated the
DEIR for public and agency comments; and
WHEREAS, a DEIR has been prepared and circulated, pursuant to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (hereinafter
"CEQA"), as amended (Public Resources Code §21000, et seq.); and
WHEREAS, the public comment period for the DEIR closed on December
9, 2005; and
WHEREAS, the City has reviewed the comments received on the DEIR,
has prepared full and complete responses thereto, and on December 23, 2005,
distributed the responses in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21092.5;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information
pertaining to the DEIR at a duly noticed hearing held on January 3, 2006; and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the State of California and the City of La
Quinta, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, that the City shall not approve a
project unless there is no feasible way to lessen or avoid significant adverse
environmental impacts, which means that all adverse environmental impacts have been
avoided to the extent feasible or substantially lessened, and any remaining unavoidable
significant adverse environmental impacts are acceptable based upon the City's
findings and determinations consistent with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta has read and
considered all documentation comprising the Final EIR, and has found that the FEIR
considers all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts which may be
caused by the proposed project, and determined it is complete and adequate, that it
fully complies with all requirements of CEQA, and reflects the City Council's
independent judgment; and
WHEREAS, prior to action on the Project and the Entitlement Approvals,
the City Council considered all significant adverse environmental impacts, mitigation
measures and proposed project alternatives identified in the FEIR, and has found that
all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts which may be caused by the
Resolution No. 2006-002
Environmental Impact Report 2005-549
Costco Wholesale and Komar Investments
Adopted: January 3, 2006
Page 3
Project and implementation of the Entitlement Approvals have been lessened or
avoided to the extent feasible and the City Council has determined that the proposed
alternatives to the Project do not: 1) meet the City's and/or Applicant's objectives for
the Project Site; and/or 2) are not feasible; and/or 3) are not environmentally superior;
and
WHEREAS, CEQA provides that no public agency shall approve or carry
out a project for which a FEIR has been completed and which identifies one or more
significant adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project unless the public
agency makes written factual findings for each of the potentially significant adverse
environmental impacts identified in the DEIR; and
WHEREAS, CEQA Guideline Section 15093(b) recognizes that the
La Quinta City Council may proceed to approve the Project and the Entitlement
Approvals, despite the fact that certain potentially significant adverse environmental
impacts are identified in the FEIR which are not mitigated to a level of insignificance,
where the City has stated in writing the reasons to support its action based upon the
DEIR and other information in the public record; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the Project is necessary
to serve the existing and future needs of the City of La Quinta.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of La Quinta resolves as
follows:
SECTION 1. Certification. Based on its review and consideration of the
FEIR as presented, the City Council certifies the EIR for the Project and that the FEIR
has been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State and local CEQA Guidelines.
The City Council adoption and certification of the FEIR reflects the City Council's
independent judgment and analysis. The City Council further certifies that the FEIR
was presented to the City Council and that the City Council reviewed and considered
the information contained in it prior to recommending approval of the Project.
SECTION 2. CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines section 15091, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California has
reviewed and adopts the CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts as shown on the
attached Exhibit A, entitled "CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts", which is
incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth.
Resolution No. 2006-002
Environmental Impact Report 2005-549
Costco Wholesale and Komar Investments
Adopted: January 3, 2006
Page 4
SECTION 3. Statement of Overriding Considerations. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, in
addition to the findings made in the body of the FEIR, has reviewed and finds that the
Statement of Overriding Considerations as shown on the attached Exhibit B, entitled
"Statement of Overriding Considerations", is necessary, and the City Council adopts
and incorporates herein by this reference as though fully set forth.
SECTION 4. Mitigation Monitoring Program Approval. Pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081.6, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
for the Project is hereby adopted as Exhibit C.
SECTION 5. Location and Custodian of Record of Proceedings. The
custodian of the records and proceedings shall be the Community Development
Director, and such records and proceedings shall be on file in the Community
Development Department in the City of La Quinta, California.
SECTION 6. Notice of Determination and Completion. The City Council
requires that the Director of the Community Development Department file a Notice of
Determination with the County Clerk of the County of Riverside and with the State
Office of Planning and Research within five working days of City Council approval.
SECTION 7. Certification, Posting and Filing. This Resolution shall take
effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council of the City of La Quinta,
California, and the City Clerk shall certify to the vote adopting this Resolution and shall
cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be filed. The City Clerk shall post the
resolution in three conspicuous places in the City of La Quinta.
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 constitute the findings of the City
Council in this case;
2. That the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, does hereby certify
Environmental Impact Report 2005-549 for Specific Plan 2005-075; Conditional
Use Permit 2005-092, Tentative Parcel Map 33960, and Site Development
Permit 2005-833 as adequate and complete and in compliance with the
requirements of CEQA for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
Resolution No. 2006-002
Environmental Impact Report 2005-543
Costco Wholesale and Komar Investments
Adopted: January 3, 2006
Page 5
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City
Council held on this 3`d day of January, 2006 by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Henderson, Osborne, Sniff, Mayor Adolph
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Perkins
ABSTAIN: None
DON ADOLPH, Mayor
City of La Quinta California
ATTEST:
J NE GREEK, CMC, City erk
City of La Quinta, California
(CITY SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J . ✓ ,r .iii
M. A E NSON, City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
EXHIBIT A
CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF FACTS FOR:
■ THE KOMAR DESERT CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN 2005-075
■ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-833 AND
■ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2005-092 FOR A 149,736 SQUARE FOOT COSTCO
WHOLESALE WAREHOUSE BUILDING AND A FUELING STATION
■ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33960
PART 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Statutory Requirements for Finding
The California Environmental Quality Act,' and particularly the CEQA GuidelinesZ require
that:
,,a. No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been
certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project
unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those
significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each
finding. The possible findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the final EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes
have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by
such other agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,
including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in
the final EIR."
In short, CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives,
where feasible, to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts that would otherwise
occur with implementation of the project. Project mitigation or alternatives are not
required, however, where they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the
project lies with another agency.3
Public Resources Code, Section 21081.
14 California Code Regulations, Section 15091.
3 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a).
Page 1
For those significant effects that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level, the
public agency is required to find that specific overriding economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the
environment.4 The Guidelines state in section 15093 that: "If the specific economic, social,
technological, or other benefits of a proposed] project outweigh the unavoidable adverse
environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered 'acceptable."'
1.2 Record of Proceedings
For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings for the
City Council's decision on the proposed project consists of, among others items: ' a) matters
of common knowledge to the City Council, including, but not limited to, federal, State and
local laws and regulations; and b) the following documents which are in the custody of the
City of La Quinta ("City"):
• Notice of Preparation, Notice(s) of Availability, and Notice(s) of Completion, which
were issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed project;
• The Draft EIR and Appendix (DEIR), issued October 25, 2005,and all of the
documents referenced therein;
• The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), dated December, 2005, which
includes all written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public
during the public comment period on the DEER and responses to those comments
and all of the documents referenced therein;
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP);
• All records regarding the Planning Commission's consideration of the Project,
-including the Draft EIR, staff report(s), transcripts and minutes of the meetings,
• All findings, statements of overriding consideration, and resolutions adopted by the
City Council in connection with the proposed project, and all documents cited or
referred to therein;
• All final reports, staff reports, studies, memoranda, maps, correspondence, and all
planning documents prepared by the City, or the consultants, or responsible or
trustee agencies, with respect to: a) the City's compliance with CEQA; b)
development of the project site; or c) the City's action on the proposed project;
• All documents submitted to the City by agencies or members of the public in
connection with development of the proposed project;
• All documents compiled by the City in connection with the study of the proposed
project and the alternatives;
• The testimony and evidence presented at the public hearings on the Project; and
° Public Resources Code, Section21081(b).
Page 2
• The record of proceeding.
1.3 Organization/Format of Findings
Part 2 of these findings contains a summary description of the proposed project, sets forth
the objectives of the proposed project, provides related background facts, and impacts
evaluated in the DEIR. Part 3 identifies the potentially significant effects of the proposed
project which will be mitigated to a less -than -significant level. All numbered references
identifying specific mitigation measures refer to numbered mitigation measures found in the
DEIR. Part 4 identifies the significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -
significant level. Part 5 identifies the proposed project's potential environmental effects
that were determined to be less than significant, and so did not require mitigation
measures. Part 6 discusses the feasibility of proposed project alternatives.
PART 2: KOMAR DESERT CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN, (PROPOSED PROJECT)
2.1 Project Objectives
The objectives of the proposed commercial development for the applicant are to provide:
• Commercial services including, but not limited to, home improvement products and
equipment, personal supplies, pharmacy, optical exams and sales, gasoline, office
and pet supplies, eating establishments, financial services, and tire and auto
services.
• Develop a retail center to provide goods and services to the community, create jobs,
and generate increased property and sales taxes to benefit the City of La Quinta.
• Offer, retain and merchandise at a scope and price not currently offered in the trade
area.
• Service a portion of the retail market that is currently traveling outside of the City of
La Quinta.
• Create an attractive, viable project, and realize a reasonable return on investment.
The objectives of the proposed commercial development for the City of La Quinta are to:
• Create a development compatible with, and sensitive to, existing surrounding land
uses in the project area.
• Complement the development of commercial centers and ancillary uses that convey
a high -quality visual image and character.
• Enhance the existing retail uses located on Highway 1 1 1 and provide local residents
with convenient access to a retail use which is highly desired by local residents,
thereby eliminating the need for those residents to drive long distances for the same
shopping experience.
Page 3
• Continue to enlarge the City's revenue base in order to enhance and expand the
quality of municipal services La Quinta residents expect.
• Diversity and expand the City's economic base, offer a variety .of products and
services, increase employment opportunities, enhance City/Agency fiscal resources,
preserve and enhance La Quinta's unique environment, and contribute to the quality
of life for La Quinta residents.
• Provide for necessary transportation improvements and strategies to accommodate
the demands of new and existing development.
• Balance the City's immediate needs for commercial property, but also maintain long-
term needs for adequate open space and recreational areas.
• Ensure adequate utility infrastructure and public services for new development, and
ensure that timing and funding of improvements are closely correlated with
development phasing.
• Mitigate the potential impacts to the surrounding area to the greatest extent
practicable, while still allowing for the market -driven commercial development,
which will enhance the tax base of the City and provide employment opportunities
for area residents..
2.2 Project Description
The Proposed Project is comprised of 26.37 acres located approximately 800 feet west of
the intersection of Jefferson Street and Highway 111 on the southern side of Highway
1 1 1, and will be constructed in two phases. The Proposed Project involves the phased
development of retail, restaurant and office, within the specific plan area. The first
development phase will include 149,739 square feet of commercial uses including a Costco
Wholesale Warehouse with associated tire center and food service. In addition, the
Proposed Project includes installation of a connecting water Line that will cross through the
City of Indio and the La Quinta Evacuation Channel to connect with an existing water line in
Jefferson Street. The first phase will also consist of development of a fuel facility,
associated parking, and entry driveways including site lighting, sidewalk, landscaping, and a
bus stop. The second development phase (comprised of two parcels, owned by Komar) will
consist of other commercial development and associated parking scheduled to be
constructed after Costco is open.
2.3 Project Alternatives
Based on the objectives and the environmental consequences of the proposed project, and
pursuant to section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the following three project
alternatives were considered and analyzed in the DER
Page 4
Alternative 1 : No Project Alternative - No Development
In this scenario, "No Project" means that no development would occur on the 26.37 acre
Specific Plan project site. The project site would remain undeveloped and in its current
condition.
Alternative 2: Reduced Square Footage Alternative.
Under the Reduced Square Footage Alternative, it is assumed that the Proposed Project
would be developed with a 40 percent reduction of the entire project site including the
building and parking areas. Under this alternative, the project site would be developed with
approximately 140,000 square feet and 15.7 acres of commercial uses, compared to
233,439 square feet and 26.2 acres proposed under the project. This reduction was
intended to respond to significant impacts identified for air quality and traffic.
Alternative 3: Alternative Site.
Under the Alternative Site scenario, it is assumed that the Proposed Project would be
developed on an alternative location, at the same level of final build -out. The site chosen
for this alternative is on the northeast corner of Washington Avenue and Fred Waring Drive
as shown in Figure 5-1 (Commercial Development at Alternative Location Site Map). The
site was chosen for consideration based on land use compatibility (Community
Commercial), frontage on a major arterial road, and size of the site (25.11 acres).
2.4 Impacts Evaluated In The DEIR
In accordance with Sections 15060(c) and 15081 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City
completed a preliminary review of the Amended Project and the decision was made that
further evaluation of the Project's potential environmental impacts was needed in the form
of a DEIR. The topics evaluated in the DEIR include all of the topics as listed below:
Air Quality
Cultural Resources
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Land Use/Planning
Public Services
Visual Resources
Biological Resources
Geology/Soils
Hydrology
Noise
Transportation and Traffic
Water Quality
PART 3: POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO
LESS -THAN -SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
The DEIR identifies certain potentially significant adverse environmental impacts that could
result from the construction and operation of the Project, which impacts are summarized on
pages 1-17 through 1-24 of the DEIR.
The DEIR identified 13 potentially significant effects that could result from the proposed
project. However, the City finds for each of the significant or potentially significant
Page 5
impacts identified in this section, Section 3, based upon substantial evidence in the record
that: changes or alterations `have been required or incorporated into the proposed project
that avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the FEIR.S As a
result, the adoption of the mitigation measures set forth below will reduce the identified
significant effects to a less -than -significant level.
3.1 Section 4.1: Air Quality
3.1.1 Impact-, Construction (Short -Term)
Construction of the Proposed Project will generate pollutant emissions from the following
activities: (1) fugitive dust emissions from construction activity; (2) grading operations and
soil disturbance; (3) exhaust emissions and odors from construction activity and vehicular
trips; and (4) application of architectural surface treatments. Table 4.1-6 demonstrates that
during construction short-term reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx)
exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds.
Exceedence of the ROG -emissions threshold is due primarily to application of paintings and
coatings during finish construction. Exceedence of the NOx threshold is due to exhaust
emissions generated by construction vehicles during grading activities. These emissions are
significant but temporary. The mobile nature of the on -site construction equipment and off -
site trucks will prevent any micro -scale violation of standards. There may be localized
instances when the characteristic diesel exhaust is noticeable from passing trucks or nearby
heavy equipment. Truck exhaust impacts can be minimized by controlling construction
routes to reduce interference with non -project traffic patterns and to preclude truck queuing
or idling near sensitive receptor sites. Once project construction activities have been
completed, project -related construction emissions would cease.
3.1 .1 Mitigation Measures
The following measures shall be implemented during project construction to minimize ROG,
NOx, and exhaust odors.
MM 4.1-1 Regular equipment tune-ups and limits in equipment idling shall be
implemented.
MM 4.1-2 During finish construction pre -coated building materials and high pressure -low
volume (HPLV) paint applicators shall be used.
MM 4.1-3 The project applicant shall employ an extended painting schedule over a two
month period using less than 100 gallons per day of low VPC_paint or ensure
that no more than 83,700 square feet would be painted within one month.
MM 4.1-4 Construction routes shall be controlled to reduce interference with non -
project traffic patterns and to preclude truck queuing or idling near sensitive
receptor sites.
5 CEQA Guidelines, section 15091.
Page 6
MM 4.1-5 The project applicant shall comply with the provisions of the City of La
Quinta Municipal Code that establish minimum requirements for construction
activities to reduce fugitive dust and PM-10 emissions. A plan to control
fugitive dust through the implementation of best available control measures
(BACMs) shall be prepared and submitted to the City for approval prior to the
issuance of grading permits. Applicable BACMs include but are not limited to:
• Cut and fill quantities will be balanced onsite as much as practicable to
minimize truck trips for import or export of dirt.
• Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to minimize the impact of
construction -related dust particulates. Portions of the site that are
undergoing surface earth moving operations shall be watered such that a
crust will be formed on the ground surface, and then watered again at the
end of each day. Site watering will be performed as necessary to
adequately mitigate blowing dust.
• Any vegetative cover to be utilized onsite shall be planted as soon as
practicable to reduce the disturbed area subject to wind erosion. Irrigation
systems required for these plants shall be installed as soon as practicable
to maintain good ground cover and to minimize wind erosion of the soil.
• Any construction access roads (other than temporary access roads) shall
be paved as soon as practicable and cleaned after each work day. The
maximum vehicle speed on unpaved roads shall be 15 mph.
• Grading operations shall be suspended during first stage ozone episodes or
when winds exceed 25 mph. A high wind response plan shall be
formulated for enhanced dust control if winds are forecast to exceed
25 mph in any coming 24-hour period.
• Any construction equipment using direct internal combustion engines shall
use a diesel fuel with a maximum of 0.05 percent sulfur and a four -degree
retard.
• Construction operations affecting off -site roadways shall be scheduled by
implementing traffic hours and shall minimize obstruction of through -traffic
lanes.
• Idling trucks or heavy equipment shall turn off their engines if the expected
duration of idling exceeds five minutes.
• Perimeter walls and landscaping shall be constructed in a manner that
assists in protecting the site from blow -sand. All walls and landscaping
shall be maintained on a regular basis to remove accumulated blow -sand.
MM 4.1-6 The project applicant shall comply with all applicable SCAQMD Rules and
Regulations including Rule 403 insuring the clean up of construction -related
dirt on approach routes to the site.
3.1.1 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
Page 7
measures are feasible and would reduce the air quality impacts resulting from construction
of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level.
3.1.2 Impact -Truck Exhaust During Construction (Short -Term)
Exceedance of the NOx threshold is due to exhaust emissions generated by construction
vehicles during grading activities. These emissions are significant but temporary. The
mobile nature of the on -site construction equipment and off -site trucks will prevent any
micro -scale violation of standards There may be localized instances when the
characteristic diesel exhaust is noticeable from passing trucks or nearby heavy equipment.
Truck exhaust impacts can be minimized by controlling construction routes to reduce
interference with non -project traffic patterns and to preclude truck queuing or idling near
sensitive receptor sites. Once project construction activities have been completed, project
related construction emissions would cease.
3.1.2 Mitigation Measures
*See MM 4.1-1 through 4.1-6 on pages 6 and 7
MM 4.1-7 The project applicant shall comply with energy use guidelines in Title 24 of
the California Administrative Code.
MM 4.1-8 The use of energy efficient street lighting and parking lot lighting per the City
Lighting Ordinance shall be required for all on -site travel paths to reduce
emissions at the power generation facility serving the area.
MM 4.1-9 The project applicant shall comply with the City of La Quinta's Transportation
Demand Management Program by submitting an active approved plan under
the SCAQMD Regulation XV program requirements. Furthermore, the project
applicant shall comply with SCAQMD Ride Share program.
MM 4.1-10 The project applicant shall notify the city and SCAQMD of the start and end
of grading in conformance and within the time frames established in the 2002
PM 10 Management Plan.
3.1.2 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measures are feasible and would reduce the air quality impacts resulting from construction
of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level.
3.2 Section 4.2: Biological Resources
3.2.1 Impact
The entire project site would be graded during the development of the Proposed Project,
resulting in the loss of 26.3 acres of various habitats (Table 4.2-2). Specifically, this would
result in the removal of 19.6 acres of Disturbed Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub. Impacts to
Page 8
the disturbed Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub vegetation community would be considered
significant as the project site lies within the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Mitigation
Area. In addition, approximately 0.70 acre of Disturbed Habitat would be temporarily
impacted during construction of the off -site water line (0.002 acre of permanent impacts
and 0.69 acre of temporary impacts).
3.2.1 Mitiaation Measure
MM 4.2-1 Mitigation for the direct impact of 19.6 acres of disturbed Sonoran creosote
bush scrub would include the project applicant paying into the Coachella
Valley Association of Government's Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard
Mitigation Fee Program prior to obtaining building permits. The project
applicant shall pay $600 per acre of land impacted.
3.2.1 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measure is feasible and would reduce the biological impacts resulting from implementation
of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level. Impacts would be less than
significant with the purchase of additional lands within and around Coachella Valley
Preserve.
3.2.2 Impact
The Proposed Project would temporarily impact 0.15 acre of "Waters of the State" within
the La Quinta Evacuation Channel during trenching of the off -site water line (0.14 acre) and
storm drain (0.01 acre).
3.2.2 Mitigation Measure
MM 4.2-2 Mitigation for temporary impacts to 0.15 acre of CDFG jurisdiction shall be
implemented at a 1 :1 ratio for on -site restoration. Prior to any project -related
activities that would result in temporary impacts to CDFG jurisdiction; the
project applicant shall acquire a Section 1602 Lake/Streambed Alteration
Agreement.
3.2.2 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DER to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measures is feasible and would reduce the biological impacts resulting from implementation
of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level. With on -site restoration at a 1:1
ratio, the temporary impacts to state waters would be less than significant.
Page 9
3.2.3 Impact
Potential impacts could occur from the installation of a permanent concrete slab (dissipater)
approximately 0.002 acre (70 square feet) used for protection and stabilization of the storm
drain. The concrete slab will be located at the toe of the slope of the Channel bank,
directly east of the proposed Costco Wholesale building
3.2.3 Mitigation Measure
MM 4.2-3 Mitigation for permanent impacts to .0.002 acre (70 square feet) of CDFG
jurisdictional area at the toe of the slope of the Channel bank shall be
implemented at a 1:1 ratio by removal of tamarisk within the Channel.
3.2.3 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measures is feasible and would reduce the biological impacts resulting from implementation
of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level. With the on -site restoration at a 1 : 1
ratio, the permanent impacts to state jurisdictional waters would be less than significant.
3.2.4 Impact
The 0.002 acre of permanent impact and 0.15 acre of temporary impact to the La Quinta
Evacuation Channel would also be considered impacts to "Waters of the U.S."
3.2.4 Mitigation Measure
MM 4.2-4 Mitigation for temporary and permanent impacts to USACE jurisdictional
waters shall be implemented at a 1 : 1 ratio for on -site restoration. Prior to
any project -related activities that would result in impacts to "Waters of the
U.S." the project applicant shall acquire a Section 404 Permit from the
USACE and a 401 Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water
Quality Control Board.
3.2.4 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measure is feasible and would reduce the biological impacts resulting from implementation
of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant Level. With the on -site restoration at a 1 :1
ratio, the temporary and permanent impacts to federal jurisdictional waters would be less
than significant.
3.2.5 Impact
Implementation of the Proposed Project would potentially impact species that require
special survey requirements.
Page 10
3.2.5 Mitiaation Measure
MM 4.2-5 Due to the presence of suitable habitat on -site for the western burrowing
owl, a pre -construction survey is required (pursuant to CDFG protocols) to
ensure that any owls that may be occupying the site are identified. The pre -
construction survey will need to be performed within 30 days of the start of
construction. An experienced and qualified biologist shall conduct this
survey. Should burrowing owls be present on the site prior to construction,
then CDFG will be contacted and consulted. Pursuant to CDFG's Staff
Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (1995), and unless otherwise directed by
CDFG, occupied burrows within the area where development is proposed
between February 1 and August 31 shall not be disturbed and shall be
provided with a 250-foot buffer from development activities. Furthermore, in
the event that breeding pairs or single birds are found occupying on -site
burrows, off -site habitat mitigation at the rate of 6.5 acres per single bird or
pair shall be pre -approved by CDFG for subsequent purchase to the satisfy
this mitigation requirement. Outside of the breeding season and in
consultation with CDFG, passive relocation of burrowing owls may be
accomplished through the construction of artificial burrows at an adjacent off -
site and pre -approved location.
3.2.5 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measures is feasible and would reduce the biological impacts resulting from implementation
of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level
3.2.6 Impact
Grading of the Proposed Project site development areas would be conducted during the bird
breeding season with potential impacts to species covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA). The Project Site would impact trees, shrubs, and ground cover that provide
suitable habitat for nesting migratory birds, including raptors. Impacts to such species are
prohibited under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code. Any impact to nesting
birds is considered significant.
3.2.6 Mitigation Measures
MM 4.2-6 To avoid impacts to nesting birds, the removal of potential nesting vegetation
(i.e., trees, shrubs, ground cover, etc.) supporting migratory birds/raptors
shall be avoided during the nesting season (if feasible), recognized from
February 1 through August 31.
MM 4.2-7 If vegetation removal must occur during the nesting season, a qualified
biologist shall conduct a migratory nesting bird survey to ensure that
vegetation removal would not impact any active nests. Surveys must be
Page 11
conducted no more than three days prior to vegetation removal. If active
nests are identified during nesting bird surveys, then the nesting vegetation
would be avoided until the nesting event has completed and the juveniles can
survive independently from the nest. The biologist shall flag the nesting
vegetation and would establish an adequate buffer (e.g., construction
fencing) around the nesting vegetation. The size of the buffer would be
based on the.. type of bird nesting (i.e., raptors shall be afforded larger
buffers). Clearing/grading shall not occur within the buffer until the nesting
event has completed.
3.2.6 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid_the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The the City Council finds that the implementation of the above_ mitigation
measures is feasible and would reduce the biological impacts to nesting migratory birds
resulting from implementation of.the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level.
3.2.7 Impact
Temporary indirect impacts would potentially occur during project implementation and
construction. Anticipated permanent and temporary indirect impacts may potentially occur
from the associated construction activities adjacent to native habitat areas in the form of
vegetation trampling by construction workers and construction vehicles outside the limits of
grading, erosion into off -site areas, increased traffic, increased noise, and dust. These
indirect impacts would be short term, but are considered potentially significant.
3.2.7 Mitigation Measures
MM 4.2-8 Temporary protection fencing shall be utilized to protect adjacent off -site
native habitats during construction. An experienced and qualified biologist
shall establish the limits of the native habitat (i.e., jurisdictional waters) in the
field prior to the initiation of any site construction activities. Fencing along
the La Quinta Evacuation Channel(upstream and downstream of the work
area to the top of the embankment) shall also be installed to define the work
limits for the prevention of vehicles from traveling beyond the construction
area and possibly causing erosion of the channel walls or other discharge into
the drainage.
MM 4.2-9 The qualified biologist shall verify in writing that the temporary and
permanent habitat protection fences have been appropriately placed and are
functioning normally during and after site construction activities have taken
place. Once earthwork and related site activities are completed, the
temporary fence shall be removed.
MM 4.2-10 To avoid native habitats, construction staging areas, equipment refueling
areas, and other areas for equipment and materials storage shall be located
within the identified construction area. To avoid inadvertent impacts to
Page 12
biological resources that may be present, storage and access areas shall be
displayed on the approved project plans and specifications.
MM 4.2-11 Activities, including staging areas, equipment access, and disposal of
temporary placement of excess fill, shall be prohibited within drainage outside
of the identified construction area. Runoff from project -related hardscape
surfaces shall be discharged to the existing La Quinta Evacuation Channel.
Runoff will be filtered using a Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) unit, or
similar structure, prior to discharging via underground pipe at the invert of the
existing Channel.
3.2.7 Finding
Changes or alterations are
required in, or incorporated into,
the Project
that will
substantially lessen or avoid
the significant effect as identified in
the DER to
a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation
of the above
mitigation
measures are feasible and would
reduce the biological impacts to
native habitats
adjacent
to the project site resulting
from implementation of the Proposed
Project to a
less -than -
significant level.
3.2.8 Impact
The Proposed Project is within the Draft MSHCP Plan area. At present, the Draft Plan has
not been finalized; therefore, approval of Take Authorization and state and federal agency
approval has not occurred. Although the Draft Plan has not been finalized, the Biological
Resources Technical Report (HDR 2005) addressed the direct and indirect impacts to
covered species as described in the Draft Plan program, and whether the Proposed Project
would be consistent with the Draft Plan if it was adopted prior to approval of the Proposed
Project. As discussed in the Biological Resources Technical Report (HDR 2005), the
Proposed Project would be consistent with the Draft Plan.
The Proposed Project is located within the boundaries of the Draft Plan, but not within a
proposed Conservation Area. Proposed activities with the Draft Plan area are required to
perform habitat assessments for the 27 covered species and 27 natural communities as
identified in the Draft Plan and if covered species are found, conduct focused surveys.
Proposed activities outside of Conservation Areas are also required to pay a Local
Development Mitigation Fee.
3.2.8 Mitigation Measures
If the Draft Plan is approved prior to approval of the Proposed Project, MM 4.2-2 — 4.2-1 1
would be required in addition to MM 4.2-12 below.
MM 4.2-1 2 The project applicant shall pay the Local Development Mitigation Fee as
required by the Final Plan. The $600 per acre fee, as described in MM 4.2-1 ,
would be subsumed by this new Local Development Mitigation Fee if the
Draft Plan is finalized and adopted prior to permit issuance or approval of the
Komar Desert Center project.
Page 13
3.2.8 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that ' will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council "finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measure is feasible and would reduce the biological impacts resulting from implementation
of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level
3.3 Section 4.3 Cultural Resources
3.3.1 Impact
While Phase II testing has resulted in findings that none of the previously recorded sites are
significant or important under CEQA, because prehistoric artifacts occur across the project
area, and due to the large number of sites nearby, the possibility of subsurface prehistoric
deposits is high. Because the project site contains sediments that are known to contain
fossils, impacts are considered significant. Development of the. Proposed Project without
mitigation, therefore, may potentially cause significant impacts to cultural and/or
paleontologic resources.
3.3.1 Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less than
significant levels on undiscovered cultural and/or paleontologic resources on the Proposed
Project site:
MM 4.3-1 Due to the presence of important archaeological sites in the immediate
vicinity of the project area, construction grading activities shall require
monitoring by a qualified archaeologist.
MM 4.3-2 Should buried cultural resources be encountered during construction
activities, work in that area must be halted until a qualified archaeologist can
evaluate the nature and significance of the find. If human remains are
unearthed during construction, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5
states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has
made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.
MM 4.3-3 Excavation in areas identified as likely to contain paleontological resources,
including any disturbed surface or subsurface sediments of the Lake Cahuilla
beds, shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor.
MM 4.3-4 Paleontological monitoring shall occur only for those undisturbed sediments
wherein fossil plant or animal remains are found with no associated evidence
of human activity or any archaeological context.
MM 4.3-5 Paleontological monitors shall be equipped to salvage fossils as they are
unearthed to avoid construction delays, and to remove samples of sediments
which are likely to contain the remains of small fossil invertebrates and
vertebrates. Monitors shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert
equipment to allow removal of abundant or large specimens. Monitoring may
Page 14
be reduced if the potentially fossiliferous units described above are not
present or if the fossilferous units present are determined by a qualified
paleontological monitor to have low potential to contain fossil resources.
MM 4.3-6 All recovered specimens shall be prepared to a point of identification and
permanent preservation, including washing of sediments to recover small
invertebrates and vertebrates.
MM 4.3-7 Specimens shall be identified and curated into an established, accredited,
professional museum repository with permanent retrievable storage. The
paleontologist shall have a written repository agreement in hand prior to the
initiation of mitigation activities.
MM 4.3-8 Due to the presence of historic Native American sites in the immediate
vicinity of the project area, construction clearing, brushing, trenching and all
grading activities shall require monitoring by a tribal monitor.
MM 4.3-9 A report of findings with an appended itemized inventory of identified
specimens shall be prepared. The report will address archaeological,
paleontological, and tribal items. This report shall incorporate the full results
of the literature review, as well as the full results of the recommended review
of the records of the Vertebrate Paleontology Department of the Natural
History Museum of Los Angeles County. The report shall be submitted prior
to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy.
3.3.1 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DER to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measures is feasible and would reduce the cultural and/or paleontological resources impacts
resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level.
Monitors will be able to evaluate any findings and half further activity until a final
determination can be made by appropriate personnel. In addition, monitoring and curation
of fossils (if found) will would reduce impacts to undiscovered prehistoric resources to
below a level of significance.
3.3.2 Impact
The cumulative total of all related project development in the City of La Quinta, including
the Sam's Club, Jefferson Plaza, The Pavilion, and La Quinta Corporate Center
developments as identified in Table 3.5-1, creates the potential for additional impacts to
historical, archaeological, and/or paleontological resources. Since historical, archaeological,
and paleontological prehistoric artifacts occur across the project area and vicinity, the
possibility of subsurface prehistoric deposits or fossil resources, possibly deeply buried, is
high. Due to the existence of the aforementioned resources, the areas that contain said
resources are to be considered sensitive for cultural resources. In addition, the presence of
sediments suitable to contain paleontological resources and the positive results of the
literature review reinforce the high potential for encountering significant nonrenewable
Page 15
vertebrate fossils. With more development, there is an increased possibility of encountering
historical, archaeological, and/or paleontological resources. Mitigation measures would be
implemented for the Proposed 'Project and related project development that is subject to
CEQA. However, through recordation and curation'of resources to provide the public and
historians the opportunity to. review these resources, the Proposed Project would not result
in a cumulatively significant impact.
3.3.2 Mitigation Measures
*See MM 4.3-1 through 4.3-7
3.3.2 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DE1R to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measures is feasible and would reduce the cumulative cultural resources impacts resulting
from implementation of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level.
3.4 Section 4.9 Public Services and Utilities
3.4.1 Impact - Fire Services
The Proposed Project may impact fire protection services in the project area. Five fire
stations would serve the Proposed Project area. The closest station, West Indio, is located
less than two miles from the Proposed Project site and is equipped with one city engine and
one city medic ambulance.
The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) performed a fire flow test for the Proposed
Project. The minimum fire` hydrant flow requirement will need to be 4,000 gpm at a
pressure of 20 psi. Using data obtained by CVWD, the flow is estimated to be
approximately 5,388 gpm, which will be available at the private fire hydrants. Once the
Proposed Project is built, it will have adequate pressure, flow; and supply designed to meet
requirements. It has been determined by CVWD that the proposed system would be able to
provide fire flow to all, hydrants to meet the fire protection system demand at the Proposed
Project site and Riverside County Fire Department requirements (pers. comm., Julie Kretz)
During construction and operation of the Proposed Project, compliance with all applicable
fire codes and ordinances will be required. The Proposed Project will comply with
applicable Riverside County Fire Code and RCFD requirements and standards for
construction, access, water mains, fire flow, and fire hydrants.
3.4.1 Mitigation Measure
MM 4.9-1 The project applicant shall pay development impact fees per City of La Quinta
Ordinance 408 to the RCFD for the purpose of developing new commercial
facilities within the City. Since no significant adverse impacts to fire
Page 16
protection services would result from implementation of the Proposed Project,
no additional mitigation measures would be required.
3.4.1 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid an impact as identified in the DEIR to a level of insignificance.
The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation measures is feasible
and would reduce Fire Services impacts resulting from implementation of the Proposed
Project to a less -than -significant level. Upon implementation of the applicable regulatory
requirements and payment of mitigation fees directed under the City's Ordinance 408,
totaling 10,504, the Proposed Project's specific impacts to fire protection services would
be less than significant.
3.4.2 Impact — Schools
The Proposed Project may impact the Desert Sands Unified School (DSUSD) school system.
The proposed commercial development project could indirectly add students to the DSUSD
as the Proposed Project will generate approximately 400 employees. However, it is
anticipated that the majority of employees would be from the existing labor force in the City
or would live in the adjacent cities. School needs generated by implementation of the
Proposed Project could be accommodated with existing resources. Further, the project
proponents would be required to pay development fees to the DSUSD. Therefore, it is
anticipated that implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in significant
impacts on school services.
3.4.2 Mitigation Measure
MM 4.9-2 The project applicant shall pay development fees to the DSUSD for the
purpose of developing new school facilities within the City. The project
applicant shall pay $0.36 per square foot in fees. Since no significant
adverse impacts to school facilities would result from implementation of the
Proposed Project, no additional mitigation measures would be required.
3.4.2 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid an impact as identified in the DEIR to a level of insignificance.
The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation measure, the
payment of school impact fees, is feasible and would reduce school impacts resulting from
implementation of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level.
3.4.3 Impact — Municipal Government
The Proposed Project may impact the City of La Quinta's Civic Center and may impact the
City of La Quinta's Maintenance Facilities. For new developments, City policies require
payment of Development Impact Fees.
Page 17
3.4.3 Mitigation Measure
MM 4.9-3. The project applicant shall pay development impact fees per City of La Quinta
Ordinance 408 to the City for improvements to the City's Civic Center.
MM 4.9-4 The project applicant shall pay development impact fees per City of La Quinta
Ordinance 408 to the City for improvements to the Maintenance Facilities.
3.4.3 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the impact as identified in the DEIR to a level of insignificance.
The City Council finds that the implementation of the abovemitigation measures, the
payment of mitigation fees directed under the City's Ordinance 408, is feasible and would
reduce municipal government impacts resulting from implementation of the Proposed
Project to a less -than -significant level.
3.5 Section 4.10: Transportation and Traffic
3.5.1 Impact Site access and circulation
Access to the Proposed Project will occur via two driveways: a full access signalized
intersection at Highway 111 at Depot Drive and a right -in/ right -out driveway along
Highway 111. A potentially significant impact may occur to the maintenance of steady
flow of ingress and egress traffic.
3.5.1 Mitigation Measures
MM 4.10-1 To provide for smooth ingress and egress from its site, the Proposed Project
shall implement the following measures:
• Provide and maintain low growing landscaping in the vicinity of the site
driveways and along the site frontage to Highway 111 (EW) for a distance
of 12 to 15 feet back of curb to ensure adequate sight distance for safe
and easy flow of traffic.
• Provide a half street improvement on Highway 111 (EW) along the site
frontage including an additional eastbound through lane, a right -turn
deceleration lane on Highway 111 (EW) at Depot Road (NS).
Furthermore, the traffic signal at the Highway 1 1 1(EW)/ Depot Road (NS)
intersection will need to be modified to accommodate the road widening
and turn lanes on Highway 111.
• Provide a reciprocal easement of access at a location on the western edge
of the development.
3.5.1 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into; the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measures is feasible and would ensure adequate ingress and egress from the project site
,Page 18
and thus minimize the transportation and traffic impacts related to site access and
circulation resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant
level.
3.5.2 Impact
Preliminary sight distance was reviewed at the site -access driveways to evaluate any
existing sight distance obstructions present. Based on a review of the area, all site
driveways can be constructed to meet sight distance requirements. However, a potentially
significant impact to safety exists if all landscaping along the site frontage and along the
north side of Highway 1 1 1 is not properly trimmed and maintained.
3.5.2 Mitigation Measures
*See MM 4.10-1 on page 18
3.5.2 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measures is feasible and would ensure adequate ingress and egress from the project site
and thus minimize the transportation and traffic impacts related to site access and safety
resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level.
3.5.2 Impact - Future operations
A summary of future year (2020) build out with project and improvements Level of Service
(LOS) and volume to capacity (v/c) ratios for the study area intersections during the PM
peak hour are shown in Table 4.10-4 of the DEIR. Figure 4.10-10 of the DEIR shows future
with project build out conditions total traffic volumes.
Development of the Proposed Project results in a decrease in LOS at the following
intersection and will require mitigation measures to achieve acceptable standards:
• Highway 111 and Jefferson Street— Estimated to operate at a LOS D without the
project and a LOS E with a 0.09 increase v/c with the project.
Intersections that operate at an unacceptable LOS without implementation of the Proposed
Project continue to operate at an unacceptable LOS with implementation of the Proposed
Project. Three of the six intersections experience an increase of 0.02 or greater in the
critical v/c ratio due to implementation of the Proposed Project, which is considered a
significant impact. The following three intersections contribute to more than a 0.02
increase in v/c ratio and require mitigation to achieve acceptable standards:
• Washington Street at Highway 111 — Estimated to operate at LOS F with a 0.056
increase in the v/c ratio due to project development.
Page 19
• Highway 111 at La Quinta Drive - Estimated to operate at LOS E with a 0.027
increase in v/c ratio due to project development
• Highway 111 at Dune Palms Road - Estimated to operate at a LOS E with a 0:041
increase in v/c ratio due to project development.
It should be noted that the remaining two intersections that fall below LOS D with or
without the implementation of the Proposed Project in the future year (2020) are located
partially or wholly within the City of Indio. Because the City of Indio has not established a
threshold for significance for. impacts to intersections that fail with and without the project,
the 0.02 increase in v/c ratio threshold was also applied to intersections in Indio. Even
though the Jefferson Street at Avenue 48 and Highway 111 at Madison Street
intersections do not meet the LOS D standard, the increases are less than significant
because the Proposed Project does not cause an increase in 0.02 in v/c ratio.
The Traffic Impact Analysis also includes a comparison between the future traffic
conditions under the General Plan Build -Out Scenario without the Proposed Project and
future conditions under the General Plan Build -Out Scenario with the Proposed Project. The
comparison of trip generations and average daily traffic with and without the Proposed
Project revealed that the Proposed Project will result in a slight increase of 137 trips
compared to the predicted trip distribution by La Quinta General Plan.
3.5.2 Mitigation Measures
MM 4.10-2 Re -stripe westbound approach to allow separate right -turn lane at Highway
111 & Washington:
The mitigation measures to achieve LOS D have been determined to be
infeasible due to the substantial construction cost and right-of-way
restrictions. The project applicant shall provide funding to implement the re -
,stripe of the westbound approach to allow separate right -turn lane to mitigate
the significant incremental impact.
MM 4.10-3 Allow northbound right -turn overlap phasing at Highway 111 & La Quinta Dr.:
The City of La Quinta has confirmed that this improvement will be
constructed by the City, using Measure A funds provided by the Riverside
Transportation Commission, in conjunction with the Highway 111
improvement project scheduled for construction in 2007.
MM 4.10-4 Add a second southbound left -turn lane at Highway 111 & Dune Palms:
A commercial development-(Sam's Club) is currently in process southwest of
this intersection and will be responsible for constructing northbound dual left
turn lanes at this intersection. If Caltrans does not require the southbound
improvement as part of .the Sam'sClub improvements and the improvements
are not otherwise completed by other development, the City has confirmed
that the City of La Quinta will complete the improvements using Measure A
provided by the Riverside Transportation Commission, in conjunction with its
Highway 111 improvement project scheduled for construction in 2007.
MM 4.10-5 Allow right -turn overlap phasing for eastbound and southbound movement at
Jefferson St. & Highway 1 1 1:
Page 20
The City of La Quinta has confirmed that overlap phasing can be
accommodated through the signal modifications that will accompany the
Highway 111 widening and improvement project. Therefore, this impact will
be mitigated to less than significant.
3.5.2 Finding
Changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the Project that will
substantially lessen or avoid the significant effect as identified in the DEIR to a level of
insignificance. The City Council finds that the implementation of the above mitigation
measures is feasible and would reduce the transportation and traffic impacts at Highway
111 and Washington, Highway 111 and La Quinta Drive, and Highway 111 and Dune
Palms resulting from implementation of the Proposed Project to a less -than -significant level.
PART 4: SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS THAT CANNOT BE MITIGATED TO LESS -THAN -
SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
4.1 Section 4.1: Air Quality
4.1 .1 Impact — Cumulative Operational Impacts
The Proposed Project would generate significant incremental cumulative impacts to air
quality. The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) provides a framework for the
assessment of air quality within the Basin. It also provides for air pollutant control
strategies, and assists in establishing a State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP defines
how the Basin will achieve the federal ambient air quality standards. Because the project is
included in the City's General Plan, regional emissions associated with the project are
accounted for within the AQMP and are therefore consistent with the AQMP. In addition to
exceeding air quality thresholds during the operational phase, implementation of the
Proposed Project along with other related development in the area will incrementally impact
cumulative air quality conditions.
4.1.1 Mitigation Measures
*See MM 4.1-1 through 4.1-10 on pages 6 through 8
4.1.1 Finding
The Proposed Project would generate significant incremental cumulative impacts to air
quality but mitigation measures 4.1-7 through 4.1-10 would partially mitigate cumulative
impacts. With implementation of mitigation measure 4.1-4, the objectionable odor impact
will be minimized to below a level of significance. Furthermore, with implementation of
mitigation measure 4.1-5, ROG emissions impact will be minimized to below a level of
significance. Unfortunately, even with implementation of the above -listed reduction
measures, construction -related activities would still result in NOx emissions in exceedance
of the identified significance threshold as shown in Table 4.1-4. Operational impacts leading
to an exceedance of the carbon monoxide (CO) threshold in 2010 will remain significant.
Page 21
Project -specific and cumulative air quality impacts are projected to remain significant after
mitigation during the construction phase.
However, as a growing and developing City, La Quinta and the Coachella Valley the air
quality impacts generated by the Proposed Project are outweighed by the benefit it provides
the community. The Proposed Project will not only enhance the quality of life by providing
employment, shopping and dining opportunities, it will generate development and
infrastructure growth and improvements. Furthermore, the potential adverse environmental
impacts identified with construction and' operation of the Project are generally associated
with normal growth, progress and prosperity in a developing community.
Therefore, pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, the City Council
has determined that construction phase NOx emission impacts, operations phase CO
emission impacts and cumulative air quality impacts are acceptable based on the
considerations described above and the specific overriding considerations as described in
the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
4.2 Section 4.10: Transportation and Traffic
4.2.1 Impact Future/Cumulative Impacts
A summary of future year (2020) build out traffic conditions with and without the project
are shown in Table 4.10-4. Figure 4.10-10 identifies weekday pm peak hour future year
(2020) traffic volumes at full build out with project and roadway improvements.
Development of the Proposed Project results in a decrease in LOS at the following
intersection and will require feasible mitigation measures to achieve acceptable standards:
• Highway 1 1 1 and Jefferson Street- Estimated to operate at a LOS D without the
project and a LOS E with a 0.09 increase v/c with the project.
Six intersections that operate at an unacceptable LOS without implementation of the
Proposed Project continue to operate at an unacceptable LOS with implementation of the
Proposed Project. Three of the six intersections experience an increase of 0.02 or greater in
the critical v/c ratio due to implementation of the Proposed Project, which is considered a
significant impact. The following three intersections contribute to more than a 0.02
increase in v/c ratio and require mitigation to achieve acceptable standards:
• Washington Street at Highway 1 1 1 - Estimated to operate at LOS F with a 0.056
increase in the v/c ratio due to project development.
• Highway 111 at La Quinta Drive - Estimated to operate at LOS E with a 0.027
increase in the v/c ratio due to project development
• Highway 1 1 1 at Dune Palms Road - Estimated to operate at a LOS E with a 0.041
increase in v/c ratio due to project development.
It should be noted that the remaining two intersections that fall below the LOS D standard
with or without the implementation ,of the Proposed Project in the future year (2020) are
Page 22
located partially or wholly within the City of Indio. Although the City of Indio does not
have an additional threshold for intersections that fail with and without the project, the
0.02 increase in v/c ratio threshold was also applied to intersections in Indio. Even though
the Jefferson Street at Avenue 48 and Highway 1 1 1 at Madison Street intersections do not
meet acceptable LOS thresholds, the increases are less than significant because the
Proposed Project does not cause an increase in 0.02 in v/c ratio.
The preceding analysis of the Proposed Project is based on methodologies that incorporate
the cumulative effects of traffic from general growth and anticipated development in the
area. This reflects background traffic and traffic from area wide growth already approved
by the City of La Quinta, plus the development of the Proposed Project. As mentioned
above, four intersections are significantly impacted as a result of the Proposed Project in
future year 2020. Therefore, cumulative impacts to the regional circulation grid are
significant and require mitigation.
4.2.1 Mitigation Measures
*See MM 4.10-2 through 4.10-5 on pages 20 and 21
4.2.1 Finding
As mentioned above, four intersections are significantly impacted as a result of the
Proposed Project in future year 2020. Table 4.10-5 specifically identifies mitigation
measures for these intersections. Once implemented, mitigation measures 4.10-3, 4.10-4,
and 4.10-5 mitigate the impact identified for each of these three intersections to less than
significant levels.
Mitigation measure 4.10-2 will mitigate the incremental impact of the Proposed Project to
the intersection of Highway 111 and Washington Street to a less than significant level.
Mitigation needed to return the Highway 111 and Washington Street intersection to an
acceptable LOS has been deemed infeasible due to construction costs and right-of-way
restrictions. Therefore, pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, the
City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on considerations described above
and the specific overriding considerations as described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
PART 5: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE NOT SIGNIFICANT OR LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT
The City Council finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record as discussed
below, the following impacts associated with the proposed Project are, except as noted
above, less than significant and no mitigation is required:
5.1 Section 4.4 Geology/Soils
Page 23
The project site is located in a seismically active area and strong ground shaking from
earthquakes could possibly affect the development; however, the Proposed Project
structures, including. the Costco fueling facility, would be subject to the requirements of the
Uniform Building Code (UBC) for Zone 4 for resistance to seismic shaking. In addition, the
Proposed Project will be constructed in accordance with other UBC criteria, current seismic
design specifications of the Structural Engineers Association of California, other applicable
regulations; ongoing site -specific geotechnical investigations, and all applicable
requirements of the State of California Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(Cal/OSHA). Therefore, no significant impacts would occur from seismic ground shaking.
Hazards including landslides and liquefaction are unlikely to occur, as a result of geography,
topography,' and site -specific geotechnical considerations. Therefore, no significant impacts
would occur from landslides or liquefaction.
During construction of the Proposed Project, there ,is a lowpotentialfor soil erosion on and
off -site. Soil erosion would be controlled and. would remain less than significant through
the implementation of a project -specific Erosion Control Plan and Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In addition, permanent vegetation shall be planted to provide
long-term erosion protection for the Proposed Project site.
The on -site soils are anticipated to possess a slight to moderate potential for collapse.
Upper soils should be overexcavated to depths indicated in the geologic report and replaced
as recompacted engineered fill resulting in a less than significant impact. The project site is
also underlain by granular soils, which are anticipated to possess -a low expansion potential;
therefore, the Proposed Project would not be impacted.
The supplemental investigation determined that the geologic characteristics on -site are such
that construction is geotechnically feasible and the proposed 'structures can be adequately
supported. Therefore, impacts resulting from the Proposed Project are not considered
significant according to the aforementioned criteria.
Impacts to geology and/or soils on -site would remain less than significant if the guidelines
and approved design features from the geotechnical reports are incorporated into design
and construction of the Proposed Project. These include:
Project shall adhere to the following project design features:
• The proposed development shall be designed in accordance with the requirements of
the latest edition of the UBC for Seismic Zone 4.
• Removal and stripping operations shall expose a firm, non -yielding subgrade that is
free of significant voids and organics.
• All excavations shall comply with applicable local, state, and federal safety
regulations including the current Cal/OSHA Excavation and Trench Safety Standards.
• Pipe zone backfill shall consist of imported soil less than % inch in maximum
dimension. Trench zone backfill shall consist of onsite soil or imported fill which
Page 24
meets the requirements for engineered fill provided in the recommendations in
Appendix E. Imported material shall consist of fine-grained sand.
• Positive surface drainage shall be provided to prevent pooling and/or saturation of
the soils in the vicinity of foundations, concrete slabs -on -grade, or pavements, with
a minimum of 5 percent positive fall away from building perimeters to a distance of
at least 5 feet.
• Continuous and isolated spread footings shall have minimum widths of 18 inches
and be embedded at least 18 inches below the lowest final adjacent subgrade.
Compliance with all recommendations and design features set forth in the geotechnical
reports (Appendix E) would ensure that project -related impacts would be less than
significant. No significant short-term or cumulative geological impacts will occur as a result
of the Proposed Project. No additional mitigation measures would be required.
5.2 Section 4.5: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Potential impacts could result from a spill or overfilling, leaking, or rupture of an UST
system, spillage from an accidental event, or surface spills and underground releases.
However, prior to authorization or start of construction of the Proposed Project, the project
proponent shall prepare a Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan (SP&CP) to prevent runoff
of potential petroleum product spills. This Plan will be submitted for review and approval of
the appropriate jurisdictional agency and all construction crew members shall be trained in
the requirements of the SP&CP. The Plan will include information on storage of hazardous
materials, emergency response procedures, employee training requirements, fire safety,
first -aid procedures, hazardous materials release containment/control procedures, and
release reporting requirements. Additional special precautions would be taken during
construction close to water bodies (flood control channel) to avoid accidental spills and
contamination of water resources (see Section 4.9, Water Quality for more details). With
the implementation of the project design features (PDFs) listed above, impacts resulting
from construction and operation of the Proposed Project would be less than significant.
In order to operate the fueling facility, Costco will have to meet the requirements of all
applicable local, state, and federal regulations. Because these standards are in place, the
Proposed Project is not anticipated to create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
Furthermore, there are no foreseeable upset and accident conditions that would involve the
release of hazardous materials into the environment.
The Proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
because the Proposed Project site is not located on any hazardous materials site as
designated by Government Code Section 65962.5. Also, the Proposed Project is not
located within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school; therefore, the construction and
operation of the project will not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within an existing or proposed school zone.
Page 25
The Proposed Project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a
public airport. Therefore, construction and operation of the project would not result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. The Proposed Project is
also not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and would not 'result in any
associated safety hazard for people residing_ or working in the project area.
Construction and operation of the Proposed Project will not impair or interfere with
implementation of any adopted emergency response plan. or emergency evacuation plan. In
addition, the County of Riverside General Plan designates the area surrounding the
Proposed Project as low for wildfire susceptibility. Accordingly, construction and operation
of the Proposed Project would not expose people or structure to a significant risk of loss,
injury, or death involving wildland fires.
Costco Wholesale has met or exceeded all the standards and requirements outlined above
for the Proposed: Project. Moreover, implementation of the Proposed Project would not
exceed any of the identified CEQA Guidelines (Appendix G(I)) significance criteria which
identify the criteria that establish a significant impact. Therefore, the Proposed Project's
impacts to hazardousmaterials resulting from the construction and operation of the
proposed commercial development would be less than significant. No significant impacts
are anticipated for the Proposed Project; therefore, no mitigation measures pertaining to
hazardous materials are required.
5.3 Section 4.6: Hydrology
Portions of the Proposed Project site are currently situated within a 500-year flood hazard
zone or 100-year floor hazard zone that is protected by levee improvements. The 100-year
zone is confined to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel located adjacent to the southeastern
boundary of the Proposed Project site. Development of the Proposed Project is not a
significant impact because the Proposed Project would not place structures within the 100-
year flood zone. With no structures in the 100-year' flood zone, flood flow is not restricted
by the Proposed Project:
Project development will cause minor alteration of the existing drainage pattern in the area;
however, the proposed improvements are consistent with the objectives and requirements
for reducing the potential for flooding of the Proposed ;Project site. Therefore, impacts are
not significant. With the proposed improvements,' the Proposed Project would not create or
contribute on or off -site runoff water that would exceed the capacity of the planned storm
water drainage system. Furthermore, the site storm drain system will be designed to
convey such storm events without impact to the constructed environment. On -site and off -
site runoff will be controlled and will not subject on -site or downstream uses to
sedimentation or damage from water forces. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
The proposed on -site drainage system has the capacity to carry the anticipated storm flows
to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. Therefore, the project would not expose people or
Page 26
structures to an increased flooding risk as a result of the project. No significant impacts
are anticipated for the Proposed Project; therefore, no mitigation measures pertaining to
hydrology are required.
5.4 Section 4.7: Land Use/Planning
The Proposed Project does not divide an established community. Overall, the Proposed
Project is consistent with and does not conflict with the environmental goals, objectives, or
guidelines of the City of La Quinta General Plan. The Proposed Project is consistent with
the adopted land use designation for the site, and does not convert general plan designated
open space to a more intensive land use. Additionally, the Proposed Project does not
conflict with any adopted environmental plans for the area. Therefore, no significant
impacts to land use will result from the Proposed Project.
The Proposed Project was also considered on a cumulative level with the other proposed
projects in the area. The cumulative effect of the projects would not result in the physical
division of an established community, would not conflict with the City of La Quinta General
Plan, and would not conflict with the potentially applicable habitat conservation plan.
Therefore, no significant cumulative impacts to land use will result from the Proposed
Project.
5.5 Section 4.8: Noise
Varying levels of construction noise may be heard in different parts of the project site
during the project's total construction period. The noise strength of construction equipment
ranges widely as a function of the equipment used as well as the load carried.
Construction noise would occur in discrete phases dominated initially by earth -moving
and/or demolition sources and later for finish construction. Construction equipment would
generate both steady state and episodic noise that may be heard both on- and off -site,
which could expose off -site sensitive receptors to short-term noise impacts.
Figure 4.8-1 summarizes the noise generation for typical construction activities. As shown,
heavy equipment noise can exceed 90 dB(A) and averages about 85 dB(A) at 50 feet from
the source when the equipment is operating at typical loads. However, noise levels would
diminish rapidly with distance from the construction area at a rate of approximately 6 dB(A)
per doubling distance.
The City's General Plan Noise Element specifies that levels of 80 dB(A) CNEL are
considered acceptable for commercial use without outdoor amenities such as dining patios
facing arterial roadways. For nearby residences, an exterior CNEL of 65 dB(A) is
acceptable. During the construction phase, heavy equipment may exceed 90 dB(A) and
averages about 85 dB(A) at 50 feet from the source with typical operation. This exceeds
the standard of 80 dB(A); however, noise levels would diminish at the rate of approximately
6 dB(A) per doubling distance so noise levels would not exceed the threshold at sensitive
Page 27
receptor sites located 350 feet away. Construction —related impacts are therefore not
significant.
Operational noise generated) by the Proposed Project is anticipated to be generated by
delivery/unloading heavy goods on loading docks, maintenance activities such as refuse
collection or parking lot sweeping, stacking or retrieving temporary outdoor storage. Noise
could also be generated from single events such as operation of forklifts, dropped pallets,
trucks at low -speed and high -rpm shifting gears, trash pick-up, etc. During the operational
phase, the daytime noise standard of 60 dB(A) is met within 50 feet of the loading dock.
The nocturnal standard of 50 dB(A) would be met within 170 feet under clear line of sight
conditions. There are no existing noise -sensitive uses within either of these distances.
Furthermore, the City's.Noise Ordinance specified allowable hours for, construction activities
to take place. Normally, most construction activities end around 3:30 PM with very Limited
Saturday work.This would not result in a significant impact as the project would be in
compliance with the City's ordinance confining activities to hours of least noise sensitivity.
Therefore generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local plans
and ordinances is less than significant.
Groundborne vibrations and noise levels could occur during the earthmoving activities of the
construction phase. Point sources of noise emissions are atmospherically attenuated by a
factor of 6 dB(A) per doubling of distance. The loudest construction activities conducted
closest to the nearest residences south of the site (350 feet buffer distance) would create
maximum noise levels of 68 dB(A) outside the existing perimeter walls. However,
attenuation by the existing perimeter walls would reduce maximum construction equipment
noise to near 60 dB(A). Inside these residences, maximum interior levels would be near 45
dB(A) with windows open. Construction equipment noise levels at the closest homes
would not substantially interfere with exterior recreational activity or with interior peace and
quiet. Compliance with the City of La Quinta Noise Ordinance would ensure groundborne
vibration and/or noise levels are kept at a less than significant level.
Project -related traffic could increase the noise exposure of sensitive receptors in the vicinity
of the project site. The Federal. Highway Administration's (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise
Prediction Model was used to predict noise levels and perform a noise barrier analysis. The
impact analysis was conducted with attention given to the peak hour traffic numbers based
on the transportation impact analysis (Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2005, Appendix J).
Fifteen roadway links were selected for analysis. Traffic noise levels were calculated for
existing conditions without and with project and for future year without and with project
scenarios. The input 24-hour traffic data and the CNEL at a 50-foot reference distance
were calculated. Table 4.8-3 summarizes the noise level impact for the four traffic
scenarios on the 48 roadway links analyzed.
I
The maximum vehicular noise project contribution is an additional 0.8dB(A) above existing
levels without the Proposed Project. There will be no significant impact to the acoustic
Page 28
environment associated with traffic from the Proposed Project because this contribution is
less than the significance threshold of 3 dB(A) as identified in the Noise Impact Analysis.
For other commercial activity, the General Plan daytime standard of 65 dB(A) can be met
within 50 feet. The closest sensitive receptor is located beyond 350 feet. Therefore, a
permanent increase in ambient noise levels due to implementation of the Proposed Project
would be less than significant.
The nearest sensitive receptors are located at a distance of 350 feet, well outside the
primary noise impact zone. They are at the outer edge of any construction noise envelope
and are additionally shielded by solid perimeter walls that create an addition 6-8dB(A) of
noise attenuation. As specified above, construction —related noise will further be confined
to the daytime hours of lesser noise sensitivity. Building assembly and finish construction
during later phases of site development would be less noisy, particularly as portions of
completed structures will inhibit direct line -of -sight sound propagation. Such noise will
further be confined to the daytime hours of lesser noise sensitivity in accordance with the
City of La Quinta Development Code (Section 6.08.050 of the Municipal Code). Noise
generated during the construction of the Proposed Project would not affect any surrounding
sensitive receptors and therefore would not be significant.
Furthermore, cumulative increases will not exceed 3.OdB(A) along any roadway within the
analysis grid. With growth of Jefferson Street in the future, the forecasted cumulative
noise level increases to 2.9dB(A) CNEL. Additionally, future development along Jefferson
Street has incorporated noise protection including set -back and perimeter noise walls at
sensitive uses along the roadway in anticipation of achieving build -out noise levels in
compliance with applicable thresholds. Cumulative traffic noise impacts are therefore less
than significant as well.
5.7 Section 4.11 Visual Resources
Evaluation of project impacts with regard to aesthetics is related to the existing visual and
aesthetic characteristics of the Proposed Project site and changes to views from areas
surrounding the project site. As the project site is currently flat, topography would not be
extensively modified during development, as shown on Figure 4.1 1-1 , Conceptual Grading
Plan. Implementation of the Proposed Project would incorporate building pads and would
be designed to allow proper access, provision of services, and drainage; however, the
primary natural topography of the site would not be impacted (Figure 4.6-3).
The proposed Costco retail building is a large, wholesale style building. The Costco fueling
facility layout is generally consistent with Costco's master design criteria, with similar
architectural features, subject to review and approval by the City of La Quinta Building
Department. The proposed buildings on the Komar parcels will blend with Costco, by
applying similar materials and colors. These architectural details are illustrated on Figures
2-5 and 2-6. The proposed Costco store is anticipated to have a maximum height of 35
Page 29
feet, with architectural elements extending as high as 41 feet, while the maximum height
of the fueling facility structures are 18 feet in height.
The preliminary landscape plan for the Proposed Project proposes a number of drought
tolerant landscape trees, shrubs and groundcover plants that are suitable for the climate
and that integrate with the architectural theme of the site. Landscape elements and
enlargements are shown on Figure 2-7, Conceptual Landscape Plana The project
proponents have developed the landscape plan to meet the City of La Quinta. Municipal
Code regulations, Highway 111 Design Guidelines, and CVWD General Landscape
Guidelines and Irrigation System Design Criteria. Partial screening of the Proposed Project
from Highway 111 and the surrounding parcels will be accomplished through the use of a
variety of plant species along the perimeters of the property.
The Proposed Project would alter the aesthetic environment and. the views of the site from
that of an undeveloped, vacant area to that of a commercial area; however, the project
would conform to the City's design guidelines and would comply with the General Plan
Approval of the Proposed Project Design would occur prior to issuance of grading permits.
The majority of the direct views to the commercial development would be from the
immediately surrounding land uses and extended views from the residential uses to the
south. The closest residence -to the project site is approximately 400 feet. The residential
development would have direct northerly views of the proposed commercial site; therefore,
immediate views from thesouth would be altered with implementation of the Proposed
Project. However, the combination of the distance from the project site, the La Quinta
Evacuation Channel acting as a physical buffer, and the presence of no General Plan
designated viewsheds, would reduce the visual impact for viewers to the south.
Mobile viewers on Highway 111 would also have direct views of the project site.
Landscaping along the northern border of the project site adjacent to Highway 111 would
provide partial screening.
The project site is not located within a scenic vista or near trees, rock outcroppings, or
historic buildings, are present onsite. In addition, the project site is designated for
commercial use and surrounded by existing commercial uses to the north, east, and west.
Therefore, no significant impacts would occur to scenic vistas or resources.
There are no officially designated state scenic highways within the project area. Therefore,
no impacts to scenic highways would occur.
The majority of long distance views are available from the surrounding vicinity, which
consists mainly of major community facilities and future residential development. However,
due to the flat topography of the area, views of the project site from distant vantage points
would be relatively obscure due to the intervening buildings and are not considered
significant impacts.
Page 30
Development of the project would modify the nighttime appearance of the area to that of a
lighted commercial area. The parking lot of the La Quinta Costco Wholesale will be
illuminated with downward pointing lights, each containing one 1 ,000-watt halide bulb.
Each light will be affixed to a pole that will be 35 feet above the finished grade. The
lighting fixtures are of a shoebox style with the bulbs recessed in the shoebox to minimize
dispersion and glare that would affect adjacent residents. The locations of the lighting
poles are sited in a uniform pattern across the entire site, approximately 100 feet apart.
Lighting poles adjacent to the boundaries of the project site will consist of light fixtures
with shields so as not to cause substantial glare to adjacent developments. The Costco Fuel
Facility will utilize recessed under -canopy -lighting. The City Planning Department would
approve the final lighting plan design.
The project would not introduce elements which will substantially detract from the existing
aesthetic character or primary aesthetic resources of the area. The height and bulk of
structural elements proposed by the commercial development would be compatible, and
create a visual relationship with the existing commercial uses in the project vicinity. The
Proposed Project would not obstruct views from designated scenic highways. Views from
the residential development approximately 400 feet to the south of the project site would
be considered non intrusive because of incorporation of a buffer (La Quinta Evacuation
Channel), desert themed landscaping, architectural consistency with desert theme, and the
presence of no General Plan designated viewsheds. Therefore, the Proposed Project's
impacts to aesthetics and visual resources from the development of the commercial
development would be less than significant.
5.8 Section 4.12 Water Quality
Construction -Related Impacts
Erosion and sedimentation due to construction -related activities will potentially impact
surface water quality within the watershed. Erosion can occur when protective vegetation
is removed and cuts and fills are left unprotected. If appropriate mitigation measures are
not implemented, such erosion can create local problems (downstream sediment damage).
In addition, improper handling of construction materials and/or equipment could result in
accidental spills that could affect surface water quality.
An SWPPP will be prepared in accordance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) requirements to outline a comprehensive program to protect water quality
from various sources of pollution generated before and during construction. Erosion,
discharge of pollutants and sediment, and drainage flows generated during construction will
be controlled with implementation of structural (e.g., silt fences, sandbags, spill control)
and non-structural (e•g•, scheduling) best management practices (BMPs) to be detailed in
the SWPPP.
Long -Term Operational Impacts
Page 31
As noted in the Proposed Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the Proposed Project
has the potential to result in long-term impacts on water quality due to the addition of
Pollutants typical of commercial/industrial development, restaurants, and parking lots,
including: -
oil and grease, metals, trash and debris, organic compounds, nutrients, bacteria and
viruses, oxygen demanding. substances, sediment/turbidity, and pesticides
The existing vegetated, unvegetated, and disturbed, open space will be replaced by a
commercial development with commercial buildings and parking lots. With the addition of
impervious surfaces on the site, storm water runoff would be expected to increase along
with the potential for urban -related sediment and pollutants.
Impacts resulting from the project may include increased runoff volume and velocity;
reduced infiltration; increased flow frequency, duration, and peaks; faster time to reach
peak flow; and water quality degradation. Under certain circumstances, changes could also
result in the reduction in the amount of available sediment for transport and storm flows
could fill this sediment -carrying capacity by eroding the downstream channel. These
changes have the 'potential to permanently impact downstream channels and habitat
integrity.
A change to the hydrologic system of the project site would be considered a hydrologic
condition of concern if the change would have a significant impact on downstream erosion
compared to the pre -development condition or have significant impacts on stream habitat,
alone or as part of a cumulative impact from development in the watershed. Currently,
there are no hydrological conditions of concern for the Proposed Project site. The CVWD
as owners of the La Quinta evacuation channel, will allow the increase in storm water flow
discharging from the project site into the channel because the channel has enough capacity
to handle the flow without flooding:
Proposed Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
A project -specific WQMP will be implemented to .address storm water runoff management
and water quality treatment objectives. This plan was prepared by Fuscoe Engineering
(August 2005). The WQMP sets forth an integrated approach involving the utilization of
BMPs designed to: (1) function with the drainage plan for the project site and flood control
channel to carry flows generated by offsite areas tributary to the project; and (2) to address
treatment of urban and storm water runoff from the developed portions of the project site.
The plan is based on a combination of onsite flow -based and volume -based treatment
controls.
The on -site and off -site drainage plan (Figure 4.5-3, Project Drainage and Flood Control
Plan) demonstrates that the storm water runoff from the buildings and parking areas will be
carried through a conveyance system to a hydrodynamic separator device (CDS unit), and
on to the La Quinta evacuation channel. This CDS unit is proposed to be installed on the
southeastern perimeter of the project site to remove pollutants typically associated with
Page 32
parking lots (i.e., trash, sediment, oil, and grease). Unit specifications, including sizing, are
included in Appendix 4 of the WQMP.
In accordance with the Riverside County Model WQMP method for determining the Storm
Water Quality Design Flow (SQDF), the site is required to be able to treat 2.9 cfs of storm
water runoff and is sized in order to treat 6 cfs.
Impervious surfaces will be created with development of the Proposed Project. The project
site is currently undeveloped and vacant, absorption rates can be potentially affected by
development of commercial uses. However, regional absorption and infiltration rates should
not be significantly affected, given the limited size of the project site and because on -site
soils are not particularly suited for groundwater recharge due to the presence of alluvium
consisting of gravel, sand, silt, and clay at lower depths. Regional absorption shall continue
after development at relatively similar rates as existing conditions. Drainage and storm
runoff patterns will not be significantly affected by the proposed actions. Additionally, the
Proposed Project is located within the service area of the CVWD and is eligible for water
service (CVWD Service Commitment Letter, Appendix 1). Any future development on the
project site would not use groundwater supplies. Therefore, there is no impact from the
Proposed Project on groundwater supplies or recharge.
PART 6: FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
CEQA requires that an EIR's analysis of alternatives include findings as to whether the
alternatives can feasibly achieve the objectives of the proposed project, and to also identify
the "environmentally superior" alternative. Section 5.0 of the DEIR contains an analysis of
the alternatives to the proposed project, including the CEQA-required "No Project"
alternative. The following section discusses the project alternatives that were considered
and analyzed in the DEIR and summarizes the consistency of these alternatives with the
objectives of the proposed project.
6.1 No Project Alternative/No Development
Consistent with Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the No Project/No Build
Alternative is the existing condition of the project site at the time the Notice of Preparation
(NOP) was published. The setting of the site at the time of the NOP is depicted in the
exhibits and is described in the Project Description, Section 1, of the DEIR. Environmental
impacts resulting from this project alternative would be those resulting from no
development of the project site.
Consistency with Project Objectives
The City finds that the No.Project/No Development Alternative would not meet any of the
objectives of the project applicant or the City. Specifically, this alternative would not allow
for the provision of commercial services, nor would it develop a retail center to provide
Page 33
goods and services to the community, create jobs, and generate increased property and
sales taxes to. benefit the City. Furthermore, this alternative would not enhance the
existing retail uses on Highway 1 1 1.
Why This Alternative is Infeasible
The City finds that this alternative is infeasible and rejects it. This alternative will not meet
any of the basic objectives of the Proposed Project
6.2 Reduced Square Footage Alternative
Under the Reduced Square Footage Alternative; it is assumed that the Proposed Project
would be developed with a 40 percent reduction of the entire project site including the
building and parking areas. Under this alternative, the project site would be developed. with
approximately 90,000 square feet and 10 acres of commercial uses, compared to 149,739
square feet and 16.8 acres proposed under the project. This reduction was intended to
respond to significant impacts identified for air quality and traffic.
Consistency with Project Objectives
Development of the Reduced Square Footage Alternative would not meet the Project
Proponent's primary objective to provide commercial services including, but not limited to
home improvement products and equipment, personal supplies, pharmacy, optical exams
and sales, gasoline, office and pet supplies, eating establishments, financial services, and
tire and auto services. In .order to meet market demand and the expectation of its
membership base, a typical Costco building area is an average of 150,000 square feet. This
alternative reduces the total building size .by 40 percent to approximately 90,000 square
feet. Costco would not be able to accommodate the demand and expectations of its
membership by offering only 60 percent of the usual services. In addition, a Costco
Commercial Center reduced by 40 percent of the typical square footage would not meet the
City of La Quinta's goal of allowing for market -driven commercial development because it
would not meet the market demands of its consumer base.
Why This Alternative is Infeasible
The City finds that this alternative is infeasible and rejects it. This alternative, while
reducing some of the environmental impacts of the Proposed Project, is rejected because it
does not achieve the project goals.
6.3 Alternative Site
Under the Alternative Site scenario, it is assumed that the Proposed Project would be
developed on an alternative location, at the same level of final build -out. The site chosen
for this alternative is on the northeast corner of Washington Avenue and Fred Waring Drive
as shown in Figure 5-1 (Commercial Development at Alternative Location Site Map). The
site was chosen for consideration based on land use compatibility (Community
Commercial), frontage on a major arterial road, and size of the site (25.11 acres).
Page 34
Consistency with Project Objectives
The Alternative Site would meet many of the project applicant's objectives for the Proposed
Project. Because of the close proximity of residential uses, the Alternative Site would fail
to realize the City of La Quinta's objective of creative a development compatible with, and
sensitive to, existing surrounding land uses in the project area. Furthermore, the
Alternative Site would not accomplish the City's objective to enhance the existing retail
uses located on Highway 111. Finally, by adding additional significant impacts, this
alternative would not meet the City's objective of mitigating the potential impacts of the
surrounding area to the greatest extent practicable.
Why This Alternative is Infeasible
The City finds that this alternative is infeasible and rejects it. The Alternative Site would
not result in any appreciable reduction in identified impacts and in fact, would lead to
additional impacts. The Alternative Site would create longer distance destination trips and
contribute to already heavily congested intersections, resulting in additional significant
impacts to traffic. Additionally, due to the proximity of sensitive receptor sites, additional
significant impacts to air quality and likely to occur.
6.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative
The No Project/No Development Alternative would eliminate the adverse environmental
impacts of the Proposed Project and is considered the environmentally superior alternative.
For the reasons discussed above, this alternative is infeasible and rejected because it does
not achieve the project objectives.
Page 35
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2006-003
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 2005-075
COSTCO WHOLESALE AND KOMAR INVESTMENTS
ADOPTED JANUARY 3, 2006
GENERAL
1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding to attack, set aside, void, 'or annul the approval of this Specific
Plan, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole
discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or
proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2 Phase I shall also include: 1) all off site street improvements. to include
widening of Highway 1 1 1; 2) .construction of a bus shelter per City of La
Quinta standards; and 3) complete interim intersection and signal
improvements at the intersection of Highway 111 and Depot Drive as
approved by the City Engineer. As a minimum, provide split phase traffic
signal operation for northbound and southbound Depot Drive traffic and
relocate the north -south crosswalk crossing Highway 111 to the east side of
the intersection. Ultimate street improvements and signal modification shall
be implemented once sufficient right of way is obtained to accommodate all
turn movements and proper alignment of lanes on the north side of the
Highway 111 /Depot Drive intersection.
3 A 6-foot wide landscaped median shall be constructed in the main circulation
entry driveway from Highway 111 to the Costco Fueling Station drive aisle
located approximately 400 feet from the Highway 111 centerline. Stop
conditions from drive aisles accessing the main circulation entry driveway
shall be implemented at this and the main circulation entry driveway
terminus located approximately 600 feet from the Highway 111 centerline. A
three way stop may be implemented at the latter intersection if required by
the City Engineer.
4. All mitigation measures contained in the Draft Environmental Impact Report
2005- 539 shall be complied with.
5. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, all projectrelated final Conditions of
Approval shall be incorporated in the Final Specific Plan document. Applicant
shall work with staff to correct internal document inconsistencies prior to
final publication of Specific Plan document. Applicant shall provide five
copies of the Final Specific Plan document to the Community Development
Department.
Resolution No. 2006-003
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Specific Plan 2005-075
Costco Wholesale and Komar Investments
Adopted: January 3, 2006
Page 2
6. All vacant parcels within the Specific Plan area shall be screened from view;
have limited vehicular access, and be treated to prevent wind blown sand.
7. The one lane driveway exiting at the Depot Drive and Highway 111
intersection shall be reevaluated at the time of a submittal of a Site
Development Permit for Phase Two buildings to determine whether it is
adequate.
EXHIBIT B
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR:
• THE KOMAR DESERT CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN 2005-075,
■ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-833
■ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2005-092 FOR A 149,736 SQUARE FOOT COSTCO
WHOLESALE WAREHOUSE BUILDING AND A FUELING STATION
■ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33960
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires the decision -making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal,
social, technological, or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental
impacts when determining whether to approve a project. If the specific economic, legal,
social, technological, or other benefits of the proposed project outweigh the project's
unavoidable environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable. CEQA
requires the lead agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a
project acceptable when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened.
Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the Final EIR or elsewhere in the
record of proceedings. In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, including the CEQA
Guidelines, the City Council finds that the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, when implemented, avoid or substantially
lessen some of the significant environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR.
Nonetheless, certain significant impacts of the project are unavoidable, even after the
incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures. These significant unavoidable impacts are
identified and discussed in Part 4 of Exhibit A. The City Council finds that notwithstanding
the disclosure of these significant unavoidable impacts and the presence of an
environmentally superior project alternative that meets some of the objectives of the
proposed project, there are specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, and
other reasons for approving the proposed project. Those reasons are as follows:
• Implementation of the Project is consistent with the City's 2002 General Plan
Goals and Objectives for development of the Project site. The project is
designated Regional Commercial on the north half of the site and Commercial
Park on the south half of the site with access from a State Highway that bisects
the City's entire regional commercial core. The project further implements
following the General Plan Land Use Element Goals:
"High quality development which promotes the City's image as "the Gem of the
Desert".
Page 1
"A balanced and varied economic base which provides a broad range of goods
and services to the City's residents and the region
The project further implements following the General Plan Circulation Element
Goal:
"A transportation and circulation network that efficiently, safely and
economically moves people, 'vehicles and goods using facilities that meet the
current demand and projected needs of the City while maintaining and protecting
its residential resort character"; and
• Implementation of the Project will enhance the City's economic base from
revenues derived from increased sales tax; business licenses and other fees,
taxes and exactions, which flow from the development of the Project. It is
estimated that the proposed project will generate approximately $5.8 million
dollars in tax revenue to the City over the next 10 years. City tax revenues in
the opening year for the Costco facility are estimated at $618,235 and
increasing in the tenth year of operation to $1,171`,837; and
• Implementation of the Project serves to implement the policies in the City's
2005-2006 Economic Development Plan including business and retail expansion,
securing Highway 111 Anchor Tenants, and diversification of the City's
economic base. The project would enhance the quality of life for people in the
City of La Quinta and the Coachella Valley by providing shopping and dining
opportunities within the Komar Desert Center. The project will add to the to the
total square footage of regional and community retail space in the City needed to
achieve the benchmarks in the Economic Development Plan; the project
anticipates building 233,700 square feet of retail and restaurant space; and
• Implementation of the project will enhance the quality of life in the City of La
Quinta by expanding employment opportunities associated with retail and
restaurant businesses, and new construction. Costco will employ approximately
200 employees. Additional commercial businesses in the Komar Desert Center
will employ an estimated 100 employees; and
■ Implementation of the Project would generate development that will maximize
future tax revenues and Development Impact Fees for the City of La Quinta and
School Impact Fees. This will help to finance the public infrastructure
improvements included in the City's Capital Improvement Program. It is
estimated that the Costco Warehouse store and fueling station will add
approximately $400,000 in fees to the City's and School District to expand
regional and local public facilities; and
Page 2
■ Implementation of the Project will result in the elimination of certain negative
aesthetic impacts associated with the currently vacant property, including but
not limited to the development of landscaped setbacks and medians along that
part of the Highway 111 that abuts the Project site; and
• Implementation of the Project will be helpful in causing new area -wide public
infrastructure improvements to be constructed, which will benefit both existing
development and other future development, including but not limited to street
improvements and public utility improvements. The project will bring water and
sewer to the project site which can also serve adjacent development. The
project will complete a portion of State Highway 111 improvements which
includes street improvements, traffic signal enhancements, a bus pull-out and a
bus shelter, pedestrian sidewalks and in addition, the project enhances the
Highway 111 Image Corridor by providing a 50 foot Highway 111 landscape
setback.
The City Council has balanced the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable
environmental risks, and hereby determines that the significant economic, environmental,
and land -use benefits of the Project, as set forth above, outweigh and override those
adverse environmental impacts identified in Section 4 of Exhibit A that are not mitigated to
a level of insignificance. Therefore, the unmitigated impacts and the decision not to adopt
the environmentally superior project alternative are acceptable.
Page 3