Loading...
CC Resolution 2007-029RESOLUTION NO. 2007-029 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED FOR ZONE CHANGE 2006-129 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-575 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 3rd day of April, 2006, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider certification of a Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2006-575, prepared for a Zone Change from Medium Density Residential, Single Story, 77—"", to Medium Density Residential, single story, 10 foot rear yard setback, RM(;0//5/10) on property generally located south of Avenida La Fonda, west of Washington Street, north of Avenida Nuestra, and east of a boundary line located 100 feet west of Calle Guatemala, more particularly described as: Desert Club Tract Unit No. 2; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 27' day of February, 2007, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider a Zone Change from Medium Density Residential, single story, „"—", to Medium Density Residential, single story, 10 foot rear yard setback, RMi;;//5/,0) in order to provide for a reduced rear setback on said property; and WHEREAS, the City has prepared a Negative Declaration in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., (CEQA Guidelines); and WHEREAS, the City mailed a public hearing notice on the 17"' day of March, 2007 to landowners within 500 feet of the project site, which notice also included a notice of the public hearing date for the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City published a Notice of Intent to adopt the Negative Declaration in the Desert Sun newspaper on March 17, 2007, and further caused the notice to be filed with the Riverside County Clerk in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines; and Resolution No. 2007-029 Environmental Assessment 2006-575 Reduction of Rear -Yard Set -Backs Adopted: April 3, 2007 Page 2 WHEREAS, during the comment period, the City received no comment letters; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Zone Change is consistent with Goals of the General Plan Land Use Element for residential uses and does not constitute a change or deviation from the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the above recitations are true and correct and are adopted as the Findings of the City Council as follows: 1. The City Council finds that the Negative Declaration has been prepared and processed in compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's implementation procedures. The City Council has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Negative Declaration, and finds that it adequately describes and addresses the environmental effects of the Zone Change, and that based upon the entire record of proceeding for this Project, there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that there may be significant adverse environmental effects as a result of the Project. Clearly no significant environmental effects will occur as a result of this Zone Change. 2. The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2006-575. 3. The Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number, or restrict the range of, rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history, or prehistory. 4. There is no evidence before the City that the Project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 5. The Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. Resolution No. 2007-029 Environmental Assessment 2006-575 Reduction of Rear -Yard Set -Backs Adopted: April 3, 2007 Page 3 6. The Project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the Project. 7. The Project will not have the environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified, which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 8. The City Council has fully considered the proposed Negative Declaration and the comments, if any, received thereon. 9. The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council. 10. The location of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission and City Council decision is based is the La Quinta City Hall, Community Development Department, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta„ California 92253, and the custodian of those records is the Community Development Director. 11. The City Council has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 California Code of Regulations 753.51d►. 12. The Negative Declaration is hereby recommended for certification. 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 is does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2006-575, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist, attached hereto, and on file in the Community Development Department. Resolution No. 2007-029 Environmental Assessment 2006-575 Reduction of Rear -Yard Set -Backs Adopted: April 3, 2007 Page 4 3. That Environmental Assessment 2006-575 reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 3rd day of April, 2007, by the following vote to wit: AYES: Council Members Henderson, Kirk, Osborne, Sniff, Mayor Adolph NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None VL NL4--_L DON AD LPH, Wyor City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: VERONICA J OIVT�CINO, CMC, City City of La Qtfifita, California (City Seal) APPROVED AS TO FORM: �\ — /P - //� M. iWrOEMNE JEN66N, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California Environmental Checklist Form Project title: Zone Change 2006-129 2. Lead agency name and address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact person and phone number: Doug Evans 760-777-7125 4. Project location: Bounded by Avenida La Fonda on the north, Avenida Nuestra on the south, Washington Street on the east, and Calle Guatamala on the west. 5. Project sponsor's name and address:: City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 6. General plan designation: Medium Density 7. Zoning: Current: �""� Residential RM(20/5110) Proposed: 1711 8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Proposed Zoning text amendment to allow a reduction in rear yard setbacks from 15 feet to 10 feet for 80 lots located in the Village. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: North: Avenida La Fonda, City Hall South: Avenue 52, Single family homes, golf course West: Avenida Guatamala, Single family homes East: Washington Street, Single family homes 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) lzrom ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Biological Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Mineral Resources Public Services Utilities / Service Systems Agriculture Resources Air Quality Cultural Resources Geology /Soils Hydrology / Water Land Use / Planning Quality Noise Population / Housing Recreation Transportation/Traffic Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) Dn the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing fiuther is required. 3_ Z Sr- o`? Date -2- WALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A 'No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A 'No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). !) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 1) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. l) 'Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact' to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVH, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). i) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the. earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. i) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 3) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a projects environmental effects in whatever format is selected. )) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance -3- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? (General Plan Exhibit 3.6) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings -within a state scenic highway? (Aerial photograph) c) Substantially degrade the existing X visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial X light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) I. a)-d) The Change of Zone will not, in and of itself, have any impact on aesthetics. There are total of 80 lots in the affected area. Of these, 72 have been developed, and are currentl occupied by single family homes. Twenty to 22 of these homes have existing 10 foot reE setbacks. Therefore, the eventual development of the remaining 8 lots for single famil residences, potentially with 10 foot rear setbacks, will be in keeping with developmer patterns in the area. Given that the majority of the lots, subdivided prior to the City' incorporation as 5,000 square foot lots, currently contain homes of the same size an mass as those that are likely to develop in the future, the change in zoning standards wil have no impact on the aesthetics of the neighborhood, or the scenic vistas from th neighborhood to surrounding mountains. There are no rock outcroppings, significant trees or historic structures on the site. The reduction in rear yard setbacks will have no impact on light and glare. -4- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact H. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide X Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? (General Plan EIR p. III-21 ff.) b) Conflict with existing zoning for X agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (General Plan Land Use Map) I. a)-c) The Change of Zone will not, in and of itself, have any impact on agricultural resources. The area of the Zone Change is fully developed, and is in the City's urban core. There are no agricultural lands in the vicinity and no Williamson Act contracts in the vicinity. There will be no impact to agricultural resources. 52 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any air quality standard or X contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, 2002 PM10 Plan for the Coachella Valley) d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? (Project Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection) Ill. a)-e) The Change of Zone will not, in and of itself, have any impact on air quality. A previously stated, 8 lots remain undeveloped in the Zone Change area. Each of these lot is generally about 5,000 feet in size. The lots are scattered throughout the neighborhooc and under differing ownership, so development is expected to occur individuall} Development of the lots will generate air quality impacts associated with construction an long term operation as single family homes. Construction of each of the lots will generate PM10, or fugitive dust. The City and regia are in non-compliance for PM10 emissions. The lots are expected to be graded one at; time, as homes are proposed on them. Table i illustrates the generation of fugitive dus expected from this grading activity. -6- Table 1 Fugitive Dust Potential (pounds per day) Total Acres to be Factor Total Potential Dust at Generation 26.4 3.2 Source: Table A9-9, "CEQA Air Quality Handbook,' prepared by South Coast Au Quality Management District, April 1993. As demonstrated in the Table, fugitive dust will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance. If all 8 lots were to be graded at once, the fugitive dust emissions would total 25.6 pounds per day, still well below the SCAQMD threshold of 150 pounds per day. Further, the City requires the preparation of PM10 Management Plans for all construction projects. These plans include best management practices required by the 2003 Coachella Valley PM10 Management Plan to reduce dust generation on construction sites. The Management Plans for the vacant lots will assure that impacts associated with grading will result in less than significant impacts to air quality. The future construction of 8 homes will result in up to 77 average daily trips on area roadways'. These trips will impact regional air quality through exhaust emissions. The total emissions anticipated as a result of these trips are illustrated in Table 2, below. Table 2 Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Buildout (Bounds Der dav) Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Ave. Trip Total Length (miles) miles/day x _ �. µ _ i 1,155 Pollutant CO NOX ROG SOX PM10 Pounds 14.8 1.6 .1.6 0.0 0.1 SCAQMD Thresholds 550.0 55.0 55.0 150.0 150.0 URBEBMIS Version 2.2 Scenario Year 2007 -- Model Years 1965 to 2007 Pollutant - Vehicle CO NOX ROG SOX PM10 I "Trip Generation, 7th Edition," prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, for category 210, Single Family Detached. 7- As shown in the Table, the daily emissions associated with the 8 homes will not excel SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Impacts are therefore expected to be less th, significant. Neither the Zone Change nor the development of 8 homes will not generate objectionab odors, and will not expose sensitive receptors to concentrations of pollutants. -g- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, X either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan MEA p. 72 fi:) b) Have a substantial adverse effect on X any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (General Plan MEA p. 72 ff.) c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (General Plan MEA p. 72 ff.) d) Interfere substantially with the X movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (General Plan MEA p. 72 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (MEA p. 72 ff.) f) Conflict with the provisions of an X adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservationplan? (General Plan -9- MEA p. 72 tt:) IV. a)-f) The Change of Zone will not, in and of itself, have any impact on biological resource The development of the 8 vacant lots will have no impact on biological resources, as tl lots are significantly impacted by surrounding development, and represent areas of 5,OC to 10,000 square feet, which have either been graded, disturbed, or affected by the sprea of ornamental landscaping from other parts of the neighborhood. The lots do not suppo species of concern, and are outside the fee payment area for the Coachella Valley Fringi toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan. The lots are scattered in the neighborhood, an are not appropriate as wildlife corridors. There are no wetlands or riparian areas on th lots. No impacts to biological resources are expected as a result of the Zone Change. -to- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of a historical resource as defined in'15064.5? ("A Phase I Archaeological Survey Report...," L&L Environmental, December 2003) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to'15064.5? ("A Phase I Archaeological Survey Report...," L&L Environmental, December 2003) c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? (MEA Exhibit 5.9) d) Disturb any human remains, including X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ("A Phase Archaeological Survey Report...," L&L Environmental, December 2003) J. a)-d) The Change of Zone will not, in and of itself, have any impact on cultural resources. The eventual development of the 8 remaining lots is not expected to impact cultural resources, as the area is mostly developed, and resources have not been identified. No historic structures are proposed to be disturbed or destroyed as a result of build out of the neighborhood. No paleontological resources are expected to occur. None of the parcels are known to have been a burial ground or cemetery. California law requires that any remains unearthed during grading be reported to law enforcement authorities, who follow a strict protocol for their recovery. No impacts to cultural resources are expected. -11- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, X as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (MEA Exhibit 6.2) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA X Exhibit 6.2) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, X including liquefaction? (MEA Exhibit 6.3) iv) Landslides? (MEA Exhibit 6.4) X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? (MEA Exhibit 6.5) d) Be located on expansive soil, as X defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (Building Code) e) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (General Plan EIR) VI. a)-e) The Change of Zone will not, in and of itself, have any impact on geologic resources. Homes eventually constructed on the lots will be subject to significant ground shaking ii the event of an earthquake. These future homes will be required to submit building plan prior to construction. The City reviews building plans using the latest provisions of th Uniform Building Code for seismically active areas. The plans will be required U conform to these standards, thereby reducing impacts to less than significant levels. -12- The area is not in a designated liquefaction potential area, due to the depth to groundwater. The area is flat, and no landslide potential occurs. Development on the vacant lots will be required to comply with City standards to prevent erosion during construction. Soils in the City are not expansive. The vacant lots, when developed, will be required to connect to sanitary sewer service provided by the Coachella Valley Water District (CV WD). Overall impacts associated with soils and geology are expected to be insignificant. -13- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would theproject: a) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the, release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application materials) c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application materials) d) Be located on a site which is included X on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a �{ private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or X physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 fi) 14- h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) JII. a)-h) The Change of Zone will not, in and of itself, have any impact from hazards and hazardous materials. Any residential unit proposed on the vacant land will be added to the City's waste franchisee's, BurrtOc, service area. Burrtec is responsible for the appropriate disposal of the small amounts of household hazardous waste generated in residential projects. Overall impacts are expected to be insignificant. The neighborhood is in the City's urban core, and is not located in an area subject to wildland fires. -15- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact VIM HYDROLOGY AND WATER UALITY -- Would theproject: a) Violate any water quality standards or X waste discharge requirements? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.) b) Substantially deplete groundwater X supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been, granted)? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff. c) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) d) Substantially alter the existing X drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR p.1I1-87 ff.) e) Create or contribute runoff water X which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (General Plan EIR p.1II-87 ff.) f) Place housing within a 100-year flood X hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance -16- Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard X area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.6) ✓III. a) & b) The Change of Zone will not, in and of itself, have any impact on hydrology or water resources. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) currently provides water to the neighborhood. When development occurs on the 9 vacant lots, domestic water will supplied by CVWD also. CVWD has prepared a Water Management Plan which indicates that it has sufficient water sources to accommodate growth in its service area. CVWD has implemented or is implementing water conservation, purchase and replenishment measures which will result in a surplus of water in the long term. The City will require compliance with NPDES standards, requiring that potential pollutants not be allowed to enter surface waters, and that storm flows be controlled within a project site. These City standards will assure that impacts to water quality and quantity will be less than significant. ✓III. c) & d) When development occurs on the vacant lots, drainage will be either retained on site, or released onto surrounding streets, as required by the grading plans for the project site. The storm water released from these lots, which is not expected to represent a significant increase over current conditions, will be incorporated into the City's drainage ways, and will be conveyed to existing facilities designed to control sediments and pollutants prior to their entry into the Stormwater Channel. These existing facilities will assure that impacts associated with flooding are less than significant. ✓III. e)-g) The area is not located in a flood zone as designated by FEMA. 17- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established X Community? (Aerial photo) b) Conflict with any applicable land use X plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan Land Use Element) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 74 ff.) IX a)-c) The Zone Change will have limited impacts on land use planning. The neighborhood i mostly developed, and the change in setback requirements will not divide this establishe community. The proposed change will allow a reduction in rear yard setbacks to 10 fee from the currently permitted 15 feet. There are approximately 22 homes in the 80-horn neighborhood which already have rear yard setbacks of 10 feet. The other homes in th neighborhood, which have been constructed with 15 foot rear setbacks, will remai compliant with the standards, since the rear yard setback is a minimum standard, an these homes exceed the minimum. As an alternative, the City considered changing the land use designation in the area t Cove Residential, which allows the 10 foot rear yard setback. However, the Cov Residential also requires a minimum lot size of 7,200,square feet. As previously stated the majority of the lots in this neighborhood are 5,000 feet in size. Therefore, a change tG Cove Residential would result in the creation of up to 80 legal non -conforming lot Non -conformities can create difficulties in securing financing and insurance for propert owners. Since the proposed amendment would not create non -conforming lots, i represents a more favorable alternative for the long term viability of the lots. The neighborhood is not located in the Coachella Valley Fringe -toed Lizard HCP fei boundary. s[:11 Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a X known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) b) Result in the loss of availability of a X locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) C. a) & b) The Zone Change will have no impacts on mineral resources. The remaining lots in the neighborhood would not be appropriate for the development of mineral extraction, as the area is filly developed. 19- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact M. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation X of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (General Plan EIR p. III- 144 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? (General Plan EIR p. III-144 ff.) c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan EIR p. III-144 ff.) d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan EIR p. III- . 144 ff.) e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (General Plan land use map) U. a)-f) The Zone Change will have no impacts on noise. The noise environment will not chang4 with the addition of 8 homes in the area. Noise impacts associated with Washingtot Street have been previously mitigated through the installation of a sound wall on tha eastern boundary of the area. No impacts associated with noise are expected. -20- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth X in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, p. 9 ff, application materials) b) Displace substantial numbers of X existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of X people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials) al. a)-c) The Zone Change will have no impacts on population and housing. The development of the 8 vacant lots will result in an increase in population of approximately 22 people, which would have occurred regardless of the Zone Change, insofar as single family homes would have been constructed on the lots under any circumstance. The development of 8 homes will not induce substantial growth, and will not displace any houses or people. -21- Potentially Less Than . Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XHI. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57) X Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.) X Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks X Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, X p. 46 ff.) KIII. a) The Zone Change will have no impacts on public services. The area is already served b, Riverside County Sheriff and Fire Departments, under contract with the City. Impacts t< public safety would remain the same. The City will collect development impact fees tc provide for additional facilities for police and fire, to offset the costs associated will these services, and the property tax and sales tax generated by the homes and their residents would also serve to offset these costs. The vacant lots will, when developed, pay the mandated school fees to offset the impact; to schools. The City imposes both Quimby fees and development impact fees to offset the cost of purchase and maintenance of parks, respectively. These fees will be required for the development of the vacant lots, and will offset the costs associated with the provision of parks in the area. Overall impacts associated with public services are expected to be non-existant. _22_ Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of X existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application materials) b) Does the project include recreational X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application materials) (IV. a) & b) The Zone Change will have no impacts on recreational facilities. As stated under Public Services, above, the City will impose Quimby and development impact fees to offset the need for additional recreational facilities caused by the development of the vacant lots. No impacts are expected. -23- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is X substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or X cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.) c) Result in a change in air traffic X patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (No air traffic involved in project) d) Substantially increase hazards due to a X design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (Tentative Tract Map 31087) e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? (Tentative Tract Map 31087) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? X (Tentative Tract Map 31087) g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, X or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Project description) ,IV. a)-g) The Zone Change will have no impacts on traffic and circulation. The General Plan EII analyzed regional traffic in the area of the proposed Zone Change. This analysis found that the area will operate at acceptable levels of service at build out of the General Plan The addition of 76 average daily trips, which was projected in the General Plan EK wil not have any impact on area roadways. -24- The 8 remaining lots will be required to meet City standards for on -site parking when building plans are submitted. Emergency access to the area will not be affected by development of the 8 remaining lots. The site is located adjacent to Washington Street, on which SunLine currently provides public transit. No impact is expected. -25- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment X requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) b) Require or result in the construction of X new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) c) Require or result in the construction of X new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) d) Have sufficient water supplies X available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) e) Result in a determination by the X wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project-s projected demand in addition to the . provider=s existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient X permitted capacity to accommodate the project=s solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) g) Comply with federal, state, and local X statutes and regulations related to solid waste? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.) -26- Wl. a)-g) The Zone Change will have no impacts on utilities. The eventual development of the vacant lots will result in a minor increase in the demand for utilities. All service providers will charge connection and service fees to the developers and residents of the vacant lots. These fees are designed to provide for the expansion of service as need arises. Water supplies have been found adequate in CVWD's Urban Water Management Plan (please see Hydrology and Water Resources, above). CVWD will also provide sanitary sewer services to the sites, and has sufficient capacity to serve the lots. The City's solid waste franchisee will service the lots, and haul waste to the transfer station at Edom Hill. From this location, solid waste will be transferred to one of several regional landfills for disposal. Impacts associated with utilities are expected to be non-existent. -27- Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant w/ Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE -- a) Does the project have the potential to X degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to X achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are X individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental X effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on humanbeings, either directly or indirectly? XVII. a) The Zone Change will have no impacts on biological or cultural resources. The area i significantly disturbed, and does not include such resources. No impacts are expected. XVII. b) The Zone Change will have no impacts on the City's ability to provide housing, or an, other goals and policies of the General Plan. XVII. c) The Zone Change will have no impacts on cumulative impacts. The lots were alread considered as part of the General Plan EIR, and no change in the number of potenfta units will result. KVH. d) The Zone Change will have no impacts on human beings. The eventual development o the vacant lots will be subject to the development standards applied throughout the City -28- and will simply build out a portion of the City which is already substantially developed. -29- XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQ. process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negath declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following c attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review The La Quinta General Plan EIR was used in this analysis. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were withi the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable leggy standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on th earlier analysis. Not applicable. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigatio Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from th earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. Not applicable. -30-